Sagittal suture overlap in cephalopelvic disproportion: Blinded and non-participant assessment

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 87, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 731-737

  Buchmann, Eckhart J ^a   Libhaber, Elena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Cephalopelvic disproportion; Fetal skull; Intrapartum clinical assessment; Molding; Obstructed labor

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH WEIGHT; BODY HEIGHT; CEPHALOPELVIC DISPROPORTION; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; LABOR; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SKULL; SOUTH AFRICA; UTERINE CERVIX DILATATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BIRTH WEIGHT; BODY HEIGHT; CEPHALOMETRY; CESAREAN SECTION; CRANIAL SUTURES; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABOR STAGE, FIRST; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; PARITY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREGNANCY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SKULL; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 49549115544     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: 16000412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00016340802179848     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Philpott RH. The recognition of cephalopelvic disproportion. Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1982;9:609-24.
2. Carlan SJ, Wyble L, Lense J, Mastrogiannis DS, Parsons MT. J Perinatol. 1991;11:105-11.
3. Stewart KS, Philpott RH. Fetal response to cephalopelvic disproportion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1980;87:641-9.
4. Caldwell WE, Moloy HC, d'Esopo D. A Roentgenologic study of the mechanism of engagement of the fetal head. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1934;28:824-41.
5. Lindgren L. The causes of foetal head moulding in labour. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1960;39:46-62.
6. Lapeer RJ, Prager RW. Fetal head molding: finite element analysis of a fetal skull subjected to uterine pressures during the first stage of labour. J Biomech. 2001;34:1125-33.
7. Neilson JP, Lavender T, Quenby S, Wray S. Obstructed labour. Br Med Bull. 2003;67:191-204.
8. Scherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, Langer O. Intrapartum fetal head position I: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the active phase of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:258-63.
9. Akmal S, Tsoi E, Kametas N, Howard R, Nicolaides KH. Intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head position. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12:172-7.
10. Dupuis O, Ruimark S, Corrine D, Simone T, Andre D, Rene-Charles R. Fetal head position during the second stage of labor: comparison of digital vaginal examination and transabdominal ultrasonographic examination. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;123:193-7.
11. Borell U, Fernström I. Die Unformung des kindlichen Kopfes bei engem Becken. [Moulding of the foetal head in the narrow pelvis] (in German). Geburtsh Frauenheilk. 1958;18:1245-56.
12. Lindgren L. The influence of pressure upon the fetal head during labour. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1977;56:303-9.
13. Moloy HC. Studies on head molding during labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1942;44:762-82.
14. Baxter J. Moulding of the foetal head: a compensatory mechanism. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp. 1946;53:212-8.
15. Calkins LA. Occiput posterior. Incidence, significance and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1939;38:993-1001.
16. Cowan DB, van Middelkoop A, Philpott RH. Intrauterine pressure studies in African nulliparae: delay, delivery and disproportion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1982;89:370-80.
17. Sokol R, Roux J, McCarthy S. Computer diagnosis of labor progression. VI. Fetal stress and labor in the occipitoposterior position. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;122:253-60.
18. Briggs ND. Outcome of labour in occipitoposterior positions in an African population. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1989;96:1234-6.
19. Akmal S, Kametas N, Tsoi E, Howard R, Nicolaides KH. Ultrasonographic occiput position in early labour in the prediction of caesarean section. BJOG. 2004;111:532-6.
20. Stipp CG. The primigravida in labor with high fetal station. A study of 1,209 hospital records of obstetric patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1969;104:267-72.
21. Falzone S, Chauhan SP, Mobley JA, Berg TG, Sherline DM, Devoe LD. Unengaged vertex in nulliparous women in active labor. J Reprod Med. 1998;43:676-80.
22. Redman TF. Descent of the presenting part in pregnancy and labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1953;66:607-10.
23. Megafu U. Factors influencing the outcome of labour in the Nigerian primigravidae. E Afr Med J. 1982;59:726-32.
24. Briggs ND. Engagement of the fetal head in the negro primigravida. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1981;88:1086-9.
25. Kolawole T, Adamu SP, Evans KT. Comparative pelvimetric measurements in Nigerian and Welsh women. Clin Radiol. 1978;29:85-90.
26. Stewart KS, Cowan DB, Philpott RH. Pelvic dimensions and the outcome of trial labour in Shona and Zulu primigravidas. S Afr Med J. 1979;55:847-51.
27. O'Driscoll K, Jackson RJA, Gallagher JT. Active management of labour and cephalopelvic disproportion. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw. 1970;77:385-9.
28. Mahmood TA, Campbell DM, Wilson AW. Maternal height, shoe size, and outcome of labour in white primigravidas: a prospective anthropometric study. BMJ. 1988;297:515-7.
29. Young TK, Woodmansee B. Factors that are associated with cesarean delivery in a large private practice: the importance of prepregnancy body mass index and weight gain. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:312-20.