Published in

Taylor and Francis Group, The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 15(27), p. 1576-1579

DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2013.870550

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Endocervical and high vaginal quantitative fetal fibronectin in predicting preterm birth

Journal article published in 2014 by Katy Kuhrt, Christina Unwin, Natasha Hezelgrave, Paul Seed ORCID, Andrew Shennan
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Objective Accurate prediction of spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) is essential to target interventions. Fetal fibronectin (fFN) is a leading predictor. A quantitative fFN (qfFN) test has improved prediction, based on high vaginal swabs (HVS). It is not known how endocervical (ECS) fFN levels compare, or which has the best predictive value. Our principal aim was to determine the difference in fFN concentration between HVS and ECS and compare their ability to predict sPTB. Methods Asymptomatic high risk women (18(+0) - 30(+0) weeks' gestation) had secretions sampled from the endocervix (ECS) and vaginal fornix (HVS), analysed by the quantitative fFN analyzer (Hologic). Mean concentrations were compared; ROC curves were calculated using area under the curve (AUC) for prediction of delivery <30 and 37 weeks'. Results Mean HVS value was lower than ECS (80ng/ml (SD142) vs 217 (SD 212) (p<0.05). Predictive ability was similar: AUC of 0.92 and 0.94 respectively for prediction of sPTB <37 and 0.84 and 0.82 for <30 weeks'. Conclusions Endocervical qfFN is higher than HVS and clinicians should avoid ECS if using traditional thresholds. ECS and HVS are both useful predictors, but require different thresholds values. Further work is needed to determine whether ECS is a better and safe test to justify the difficulty in sampling.