Pre-induction sonographic assessment of the cervix in the prediction of successful induction of labour in nulliparous women

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 389-393

  Keepanasseril, Anish ^a   Suri, Vanita ^a   Bagga, Rashmi ^a   Aggarwal, Neelam ^a  

^a POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH   (India)

Author keywords

Bishop score; Cervical length; Labour induction; Posterior cervical angle; Transvaginal sonography

Indexed keywords

MISOPROSTOL; OXYTOCIN; PROSTAGLANDIN E2;

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; CHI SQUARE TEST; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LABOR INDUCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MONOTHERAPY; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; NULLIPARA; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANK SUM TEST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REFERENCE VALUE; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVIX; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

ADULT; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; CERVIX UTERI; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABOR, INDUCED; LOGISTIC MODELS; PARITY; PREGNANCY; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 34548710334     PISSN: 00048666     EISSN: 1479828X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2007.00762.x     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Induction of Labor. Evidence-based clinical guideline number 9. London: RCOG Clinical Support Unit, 2001.
2. Rayburn WF, Zhang J. Riding rates of labor induction: Present concerns and future strategies. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 100: 164-167.
3. Induction of labor. In: Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth J, Gilstrap LC, Wenstorm KD, eds. William's Obstetrics, 22nd edn. New York, NY: Macgraw-Hill, 2005: 535-545.
4. Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964; 24: 266-268.
5. Goldberg J, Newman RB, Rust PF. Interobserver reliability of digital and endovaginal ultrasonographic measurements. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 853-858.
6. Hendrix NW, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC, Magnan EF, Martin Jr JN, Devoe LD. Bishop score: A poor diagnostic test to predict failed induction versus vaginal delivery. Southern Med J 1998; 91: 248-252.
7. Pandis GK, Papageorghiou AT, Ramanathan VG, Thompson MO, Nicolaides KH. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 623-628.
8. Yang SH, Roh CR, Kim JH. Transvaginal ultrasonography for cervical assessment before induction of labor. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23: 375-382.
9. Rane SM, Pandis GK, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prolonged pregnancy: The effect of parity in the prediction of induction to delivery interval. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 40-44.
10. Daskalakis G, Thomakos N, Hatziioannou L, Mesogitis S, Papantoniou N, Antsaklis A. Sonographic cervical length measurement before labor induction in term nulliparous women. Fetal Diagn Ther 2006; 21 (1): 34-38.
11. Rane SM, Pandis GK, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prolonged pregnancy: The effect of parity in the need for cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 45-48.
12. Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM, Edmonds DK, Rodeck CH. Preinduction cervical assessment by Bishop's score and transvaginal ultrasound. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1991; 40: 17-23.
13. Chandra S, Crane JM, Hutchens D, Young DC. Transvaginal ultrasound and digital examination in predicting successful labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98: 2-6.
14. Roman H, Verspyck E, Vercoustre L et al. Does the ultrasound examination when the cervix is unfavorable improve the prediction of failed labor induction? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 357-362.
15. Reis FM, Gervasi MT, Florio P et al. Prediction of successful induction of labor at term: Role of clinical history, digital examination, ultrasound assessment of the cervix, and fetal fibronectin assay. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 1361-1367.
16. Andersen HF. Transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasonography of the uterine cervix during pregnancy. J Clin Ultrasound 1991; 19: 77-83.
17. Rane SM, Pandis GK, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. The value of ultrasound in the prediction of successful induction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24: 538-549.
18. Rozenberg P, Chevret S, Chastang C, Ville Y. Comparison of digital and ultrasonographic examination of the cervix in predicting the time interval from the induction to delivery in women with a low bishop score. BJOG 2005; 112: 192-196.
19. Ware V, Raynor BD. Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1030-1032.