Prediction of successful labor induction using transvaginal sonographic cervical measurements

Journal of Clinical Ultrasound

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 76-83

  Pitarello, Patricia da Rocha Pennachiotti ^a   Tadashi Yoshizaki, Carlos ^a   Ruano, Rodrigo ^a,b   Zugaib, Marcelo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical length; Cervix; Labor; Labor induction; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DELIVERY; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LABOR INDUCTION; METHODOLOGY; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; UTERINE CERVIX; VAGINA;

ADULT; CERVIX UTERI; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; ENDOSONOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; LABOR, INDUCED; PREGNANCY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL; VAGINA; YOUNG ADULT;

MLCS; MLOWN;

EID: 84872407495     PISSN: 00912751     EISSN: 10970096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jcu.21929     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, et al. Births: final data for 2003. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2005; 54: 1.
2. ACOG Committee Opinion. New U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling on Cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy. Number 283, May 2003. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003; 82: 137.
3. ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 283, May 2003. New U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling on Cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101: 1049.
4. Luthy DA, Malmgren JA, Zingheim RW. Cesarean delivery after elective induction in nulliparous women: the physician effect. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191: 1511.
5. Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964; 24: 266.
6. Burnett JEJr. Preinduction scoring: an objective approach to induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1966; 28: 479.
7. Crane JM. Factors predicting labor induction success: a critical analysis. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006; 49: 573.
8. Gabriel R, Darnaud T, Chalot F, et al. Transvaginal sonography of the uterine cervix prior to labor induction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19: 254.
9. Pandis GK, Papageorghiou AT, Ramanathan VG, et al. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 623.
10. Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, et al. Pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length in prolonged pregnancy: the effect of parity in the prediction of the need for Cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 45.
11. Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM, Edmonds DK, et al. Preinduction cervical assessment by Bishop's score and transvaginal ultrasound. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1991; 40: 17.
12. Watson WJ, Stevens D, Welter S, et al. Factors predicting successful labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88: 990.
13. Farah LA, Sanchez-Ramos L, Rosa C, et al. Randomized trial of two doses of the prostaglandin E1 analog misoprostol for labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 364; discussion369.
14. Wing DA, Ham D, Paul RH. A comparison of orally administered misoprostol with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1155.
15. Wing DA, Ortiz-Omphroy G, Paul RH. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 612.
16. Wing DA, Rahall A, Jones MM, et al. Misoprostol: an effective agent for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172: 1811.
17. Chandra S, Crane JM, Hutchens D, et al. Transvaginal ultrasound and digital examination in predicting successful labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98: 2.
18. Gomes F, Ramalho C, Machado AP, et al. Transvaginal ultrasound assessment of the cervix and digital examination before labor induction. Acta Med Port 2006; 19: 109.
19. Andersen HF, Nugent CE, Wanty SD, et al. Prediction of risk for preterm delivery by ultrasonographic measurement of cervical length. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163: 859.
20. Boozarjomehri F, Timor-Tritsch I, Chao CR, et al. Transvaginal ultrasonographic evaluation of the cervix before labor: presence of cervical wedging is associated with shorter duration of induced labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171: 1081.
21. Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, et al. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 567.
22. Sonek JD, Iams JD, Blumenfeld M, et al. Measurement of cervical length in pregnancy: comparison between vaginal ultrasonography and digital examination. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 76: 172.
23. Crane JM, Van den Hof M, Armson BA, et al. Transvaginal ultrasound in the prediction of preterm delivery: singleton and twin gestations. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 357.
24. Friedman EA, Niswander KR, Bayonet-Rivera NP, et al. Relation of prelabor evaluation to inducibility and the course of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1966; 28: 495.
25. Jackson GM, Ludmir J, Bader TJ. The accuracy of digital examination and ultrasound in the evaluation of cervical length. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 79: 214.
26. Peregrine E, O'Brien P, Omar R, et al. Clinical and ultrasound parameters to predict the risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107: 227.
27. Gomez Laencina AM, Sanchez FG, Gimenez JH, et al. Comparison of ultrasonographic cervical length and the Bishop score in predicting successful labor induction. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2007; 86: 799.
28. Gonen R, Degani S, Ron A. Prediction of successful induction of labor: comparison of transvaginal ultrasonography and the Bishop score. Eur J Ultrasound 1998; 7: 183.
29. Roman H, Verspyck E, Vercoustre L, et al. Does ultrasound examination when the cervix is unfavorable improve the prediction of failed labor induction? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 357.
30. Concato J, Feinstein AR, Holford TR. The risk of determining risk with multivariable models. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 201.
31. Daskalakis G, Thomakos N, Hatziioannou L, et al. Sonographic cervical length measurement before labor induction in term nulliparous women. Fetal Diagn Ther 2006; 21: 34.
32. Eggebo TM, Okland I, Heien C, et al. Can ultrasound measurements replace digitally assessed elements of the Bishop score? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88: 325.
33. Elghorori MR, Hassan I, Dartey W, et al. Comparison between subjective and objective assessments of the cervix before induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 26: 521.
34. Goldberg J, Newman RB, Rust PF. Interobserver reliability of digital and endovaginal ultrasonographic cervical length measurements. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 853.
35. Bueno B, San-Frutos L, Salazar F, et al. Variables that predict the success of labor induction. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005; 84: 1093.
36. Hatfield AS, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Sonographic cervical assessment to predict the success of labor induction: a systematic review with metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197: 186.
37. 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.
38. Park KH. Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement in predicting failed labor induction and cesarean delivery for failure to progress in nulliparous women. J Korean Med Sci 2007; 22: 722.
39. Rovas L, Sladkevicius P, Strobel E, et al. Three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound assessment of the cervix for the prediction of successful induction of labor with prostaglandin in prolonged pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med 2005; 24: 933.
40. Ware V, Raynor BD. Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1030.