Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) is a disorder due to pulmonary immaturity with a high mortality characterized by low levels of pulmonary surfactant. RDS is one of the important causes of mortality in neonates. Objective: The aim of the study is to determine the lamellar body count (LBC) cutoff value for foetal lung maturity and to evaluate the clinical usefulness of LBC in predicting the neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and to find if the Measurement of LBC can replace the conventional Lecithin/Sphingomyelin ratio. Methods: This prospective observational study was performed on total 47 pregnant women divided as 19 patients with premature labor and 28 patients with healthy full-term singleton pregnancy as controls, with gestational age between 28 – 41 weeks at Ain Shams university maternity hospital in period between April 2014 and January 2015 with inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: RDS was diagnosed in 20 neonates, two neonates in the 1st group (7.1%) While 18 neonates in 2nd (94.7%) showed development of RDS. Mean lamellar body count in newborns with RDS: 39,200 ± 12,438 with median 37,500 and p-value was <0.0001. ROC (receiver operator characteristics) curve showed that by using 51000/µL as a cut-off point for LBC it is a good predictor for fetal lung maturity with sensitivity 95% and specificity 96.3%. There is a direct relationship between the gestational age and the lamellar body count as the lamellar body count increases as long as the gestational age proceeds with a highly significant positive correlation (p value <0.0001). Conclusion: As evident from the current study, LBC count now replacing the conventional Lecithin/Sphingomyelin ratio because the test can be performed with equipment found in most clinical analysis laboratories and is reliable in predicting foetal lung maturity. This study suggests that LBC cutoff value of ≥51,000/µL can predict pulmonary maturity and reduce the risk of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome.
Selim et al. (Tue,) studied this question.