Humerospinous distance measurements: Accuracy and usefulness for predicting shoulder dystocia in delivery at term

Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 115-119

  Klaij, F A V ^a   Geirsson, R T ^a   Nielsen, H ^a   Hreinsdottir M ^a   Haraldsdottir K R ^a  

^a LANDSPITALI UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Iceland)

Author keywords

Humerospinous distance; Shoulder dystocia; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH WEIGHT; BODY MASS; CERVICAL SPINE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DYSTOCIA; FEMALE; FETUS; HUMAN; HUMERUS HEAD; LABOR; MALE; MEASUREMENT; NATURAL CHILDBIRTH; NEWBORN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; SHOULDER INJURY; ULTRASOUND; WEIGHT GAIN;

ADULT; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; DYSTOCIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; HUMERUS; INFANT, NEWBORN; LABOR PRESENTATION; PREGNANCY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; SHOULDER; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 0031709280     PISSN: 09607692     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1998.12020115.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Geary M, McParland P, Johnson H, Srronge J. Shoulder dystocia - is it predictable? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1995;62:15-18
2. Gonen R, Spiegel D, Abend M. Is macrosomia predictable, and are shoulder dystocia and birth trauma preventable? Obstet Gynecol 1996;88:526-8
3. Morrison JC, Sanders JR, Magann EF, Wiser WL. The diagnosis and management of dystocia of the shoulder. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1992;175:515-22
4. Benedetti TJ, Gabbe SG. A complication of fetal macrosomia and prolonged second stage of labor with midpelvic delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1978;52:526-9
5. Gonik B, Stringer CA, Held B. An alternate maneuver for management of shoulder dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;145:882-4
6. Baskett TF, Allen AC. Perinatal implications of shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:14-17
7. Leary JA, Leonetti HB. Shoulder dystocia: prevention and treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;162:5-9
8. Weeks JW, Pitman T, Spinnato JA II. Fetal macrosomia: does antenatal prediction affect delivery route and birth outcome? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:1215-19
9. Nordic Medical Statistics Committee. Births and Infant Mortality in the Nordic Countries. Reykjavik: NOMESKO, 1993:39
10. Riska A, Laine H, Voutilainen P, Kariniemi V. Estimation of fetal shoulder width by measurement of the humerospinous distance by ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1996;7:272-4
11. Persson PH, Weldner BM. Reliability of ultrasound fetometry in estimating gestational age in the second trimester. Acta Obstet Gynecol Stand 1986;65:481-3
12. Eik-Nes SH, Gröttum P, Persson PH, Marsál K. Prediction of fetal growth deviation by ultrasonic biometry. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1982;61:53-8
13. Kastler B, Gangi A, Mathelin C, Germain P, Archan J, Treisser A, Dietemann JL, Wackenheim A. Fetal shoulder measurements with MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17:777-80
14. Nocon JJ, McKenzie DK, Thomas LJ, Hansell RS. Shoulder dystocia: an analysis of risks and obstetric maneuvers. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1732-9
15. Lewis DF, Raymond RC, Perkins MB, Brooks GG, Heymann AR. Recurrence rate of shoulder dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:1369-71
16. Gonen O, Rosen DJD, Dolfin Z, Tepper R, Markov S, Fejgin MD. Induction of labor versus expectant management in macrosomia: a randomized study. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89: 913-17
17. Deter RL, Harrist RB. Assessment of normal fetal growth. In Chervenak FA, Isaacson GC, Campbell S, eds. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Boston, Toronto and London: Little, Brown, 1993:361-85