Amniopatch procedure after previable iatrogenic rupture of the membranes: a two‐center review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze success rates and pregnancy outcomes of amniopatch procedures for previable iatrogenic preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) with associated oligohydramnios. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of amniopatch procedures performed at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium, and the Mount Sinai Hospital Toronto, Canada. Cases were analyzed overall and in two sub-groups: PPROM after a needle-based procedure (NP group, n = 13) or after fetoscopic intervention (FI group, n = 11). Complete technical success was defined as cessation of leakage and normalization of amniotic fluid volume, partial success as cessation of leakage, or re-establishment of volume. Further outcomes were pregnancy duration and outcome, fetal/neonatal morbidity and mortality, and maternal morbidity. RESULTS: Gestational age at amniopatch was comparable in both groups (NP: 20.1, FI: 21.0 weeks). Amniopatch was completely and partially successful in 29% (NP: 31%; FI: 27%) and 29% (NP: 15%; FI: 45%), respectively. Mean gestational age at delivery was 27.5 weeks (NP: 25.5; FI: 29.4 weeks). Overall neonatal survival was 17/31 (55%) (NP: 4/13 (31%), FI: 13/18 (72%); p = .02). Chorioamnionitis occurred in three cases, two associated with maternal sepsis. Severe neonatal morbidity occurred in two survivors. CONCLUSION: Amniopatch for iPPROM was successful in 58%, with an overall live birth rate of 68% and survival to discharge of 55%.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".