MARATTO

article · Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics

Clinical utility of novel point-of-care Amnioquick card tests for the assessment of pre-labor rupture of fetal membranes: a narrative review

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Pre-labor rupture of membranes (PROM) remains a major contributor to adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, particularly in settings where diagnostic uncertainty delays appropriate intervention. Novel point-of-care biochemical assays, including the Amnioquick card test, have emerged to address the limitations of conventional bedside methods in PROM diagnosis. AREAS COVERED: This narrative review synthesizes evidence from nine peer-reviewed studies encompassing 1,255 participants to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, clinical applicability, and limitations of the Amnioquick assays. Reported sensitivity ranged from 93.3% to 100%, specificity (86.4%-100%), positive predictive value (87.3%-100%), negative predictive value (73.7%-100%), and overall accuracy from 90.0% to 99.1%. These results demonstrate robust diagnostic performance across diverse clinical and geographic contexts, with consistent findings even in equivocal samples. EXPERT OPINION: Amnioquick provides rapid, reliable confirmation of PROM at bedside using dual markers insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (IGFBP-1) and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), improving accuracy over single marker or pH tests and reducing unnecessary interventions. Its simplicity, minimal infrastructure needs, and quick results make it suitable for low and middle-income settings. Barriers such as cost, limited multicentre validation, and reduced reliability in contaminated samples remain. Future goals include triton-free formulation, integration with digital readers and electronic decision tools, and large multicentre outcome-linked evaluations.

Research topics

  • Preterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
  • Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Pelvic floor disorders treatments

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.1080/14737159.2026.2671357

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.