The role of cervical electrical impedance spectroscopy in the prediction of the course and outcome of induced labour

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Volumn 9, Issue , 2009, Pages 40-

  Jokhi, Roobin P ^a   Brown, Brian H ^a   Anumba, Dilly O C ^a  

^a SHEFFIELD TEACHING HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRICAL IMPEDANCE SPECTROSCOPY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABOR INDUCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PREDICTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROC CURVE; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPECTROSCOPY; VAGINAL DELIVERY; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FETUS MONITORING; IMPEDANCE; LABOR COMPLICATION; LABOR STAGE 1; METHODOLOGY; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; SIGNAL PROCESSING; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE CERVIX;

DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AREA UNDER CURVE; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; CERVIX UTERI; CESAREAN SECTION; ELECTRIC IMPEDANCE; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABOR STAGE, FIRST; LABOR, INDUCED; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE MONITORING;

EID: 70349923926     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712393     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-9-40     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. NHS maternity statistics, England: 2003-04. Government Statistical Service for the Department of Health 2005, , http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/Publicati onsStatistics/DH_4107060
2. Kurup A, Chua S, Arulkumaran S, Tham KF, Tay D, Ratnam SS. Induction of labour in nulliparas with poor cervical score: oxytocin or prostaglandin vaginal pessaries?. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynecol 1991, 31(3):223-226.
3. Bishop EH. Pelvic Scoring for Elective Induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964, 24:266-268. 10.1097/00003081-200009000-00004, 14199536.
4. Edwards RK, Richards DS. Preinduction cervical assessment. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000, 43(3):440-446. 10.1097/00003081-200009000-00004, 10949748.
5. Hendrix NW, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC, Magann EF, Martin JN, Devoe LD. Bishop score: a poor diagnostic test to predict failed induction versus vaginal delivery. South Med J 1998, 91(3):248-252. 10.1046/j.0960-7692.2001.00580.x, 9521363.
6. Pandis GK, Papageorghiou AT, Ramanathan VG, Thompson MO, Nicolaides KH. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001, 18(6):623-628. 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00050.x, 11844202.
7. Cook CM, Ellwood DA. The cervix as a predictor of preterm delivery in 'at-risk' women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000, 15(2):109-113. 10.1046/j.0960-7692.2001.00526.x, 10775991.
8. Guzman ER, Walters C, Ananth CV, O'Reilly-Green C, Benito CW, Palermo A, Vintzileos AM. A comparison of sonographic cervical parameters in predicting spontaneous preterm birth in high-risk singleton gestations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001, 18(3):204-210. 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00346-9, 11555447.
9. Taipale P, Hiilesmaa V. Sonographic measurement of uterine cervix at 18-22 weeks' gestation and the risk of preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1998, 92(6):902-907. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00549.x, 9840546.
10. Rozenberg P, Chevret S, Chastang C, Ville Y. Comparison of digital and ultrasonographic examination of the cervix in predicting time interval from induction to delivery in women with a low Bishop score. BJOG 2005, 112(2):192-196. 10.1088/0967-3334/17/4A/014, 15663583.
11. Avis NJ, Lindow SW, Kleinermann F. In vitro multifrequency electrical impedance measurements and modelling of the cervix in late pregnancy. Physiol Meas 1996, 17(Suppl 4A):A97-103. 10.1088/0967-3334/23/1/315, 9001608.
12. Walker DC, Brown BH, Smallwood RH, Hose DR, Jones DM. Modelled current distribution in cervical squamous tissue. Physiol Meas 2002, 23(1):159-168. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00530.x, 11876229.
13. Brown BH, Milnes P, Abdul S, Tidy JA. Detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using impedance spectroscopy: a prospective study. BJOG 2005, 112:802-806. 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)09095-9, 15924541.
14. Brown BH, Tidy JA, Boston K, Blackett AD, Smallwood RH, Sharp F. Relation between tissue structure and imposed electrical current flow in cervical neoplasia. Lancet 2000, 355(9207):892-895. 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.12.029, 10752706.
15. Gandhi SV, Walker D, Milnes P, Mukherjee S, Brown BH, Anumba DO. Electrical impedance spectroscopy of the cervix in non-pregnant and pregnant women. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006, 129(2):145-149. 10.1080/14767050412331312230, 16517044.
16. O'Connell MP, Avis NJ, Brown BH, Killick SR, Lindow SW. Electrical impedance measurements: an objective measure of prelabor cervical change. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2003, 14(6):389-391. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb10410.x, 15061317.
17. O'Connell MP, Tidy J, Wisher SJ, Avis NJ, Brown BH, Lindow SW. An in vivo comparative study of the pregnant and nonpregnant cervix using electrical impedance measurements. BJOG 2000, 107(8):1040-1041. 10.1186/1475-925X-5-62, 10955439.
18. Gandhi SV, Walker DC, Brown BH, Anumba DO. Comparison of human uterine cervical electrical impedance measurements derived using two tetrapolar probes of different sizes. Biomed Eng Online 2006, 5:62. 10.1093/glycob/cwh137, 1684260, 17125510.
19. Straach KJ, Shelton JM, Richardson JA, Hascall VC, Mahendroo MS. Regulation of hyaluronan expression during cervical ripening. Glycobiology 2005, 15(1):55-65. 10.1093/glycob/cwh137, 15317739.
20. Osmers R, Rath W, Adelmann-Grill BC, Fittkow C, Kuloczik M, Szeverenyi M, Tschesche H, Kuhn W. Origin of cervical collagenase during parturition. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992, 166(5):1455-1460. 10.1093/molehr/6.4.375, 1317677.
21. Sennstrom MB, Ekman G, Westergren-Thorsson G, Malmstrom A, Bystrom B, Endresen U, Mlambo N, Norman M, Stabi B, Brauner A. Human cervical ripening, an inflammatory process mediated by cytokines. Mol Hum Reprod 2000, 6(4):375-381. 10.1093/molehr/6.4.375, 10729321.
22. Kleissl HP, Rest M, Naftolin F, Glorieux FH, de Leon A. Collagen changes in the human uterine cervix at parturition. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1978, 130(7):748-753.
23. Uldbjerg N, Malmstrom A, Ekman G, Ulmsten U. The integrity of cervical collagen during pregnancy and labor. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1985, 20(2):68-73.
24. Ekman G, Malmstrom A, Uldbjerg N, Ulmsten U. Cervical collagen: an important regulator of cervical function in term labor. Obstet Gynecol 1986, 67(5):633-636.
25. Uldbjerg N, Ekman G, Malmstrom A, Olsson K, Ulmsten U. Ripening of the human uterine cervix related to changes in collagen, glycosaminoglycans, and collagenolytic activity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983, 147(6):662-666. 10.1080/01443610600594922, 6638110.
26. Elghorori MR, Hassan I, Dartey W, Abdel-Aziz E. A way to lend objectivity to Bishop score. J Obstet Gynaecol 2006, 26(4):311-316. 10.1097/00003081-200609000-00017, 16753679.
27. Crane JM. Factors predicting labor induction success: a critical analysis. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006, 49(3):573-584. 10.1088/0967-3334/26/2/004, 16885664.
28. Gonzalez-Correa CA, Brown BH, Smallwood RH, Walker DC, Bardhan KD. Electrical bioimpedance readings increase with higher pressure applied to the measuring probe. Physiol Meas 2005, 26(2):S39-47. 10.1088/0967-3334/24/2/369, 15798245.
29. Jones DM, Smallwood RH, Hose DR, Brown BH, Walker DC. Modelling of epithelial tissue impedance measured using three different designs of probe. Physiol Meas 2003, 24(2):605-623. 10.1088/0967-3334/24/2/369, 12812442.