A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part II: The meta-analyses

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 93, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 571-586

  Olofsson, Per ^a   Ayres De Campos, Diogo ^b   Kessler, Jörg ^c,d   Tendal, Britta ^e   Yli, Branka M ^f   Devoe, Lawrence ^g  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b HOSPITAL DE SÃO JOÃO   (Portugal)

^c HAUKELAND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^e Danish Health and Medicines Authority   (Denmark)

^f OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^g MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Cardiotocography; fetal surveillance; meta analysis; metabolic acidosis; randomized controlled trial; ST analysis

Indexed keywords

BRAIN DISEASE; CARDIOTOCOGRAPHY; CESAREAN SECTION; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FETAL SCALP BLOOD SAMPLING; FETUS BLOOD SAMPLING; FETUS DISTRESS; FETUS MONITORING; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTAL DELIVERY; INTUBATION; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METABOLIC ACIDOSIS; NEONATAL ENCEPHALOPATHY; NEWBORN DISEASE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERINATAL MORTALITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; ST SEGMENT; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

CARDIOTOCOGRAPHY; FETAL SURVEILLANCE; META-ANALYSIS; METABOLIC ACIDOSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; ST ANALYSIS;

ACIDOSIS; CARDIOTOCOGRAPHY; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FETAL DISTRESS; HEART RATE, FETAL; HUMANS; LABOR, OBSTETRIC; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PREGNANCY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84901641480     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: 16000412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12412     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Neilson JP,. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(4): CD000116.
2. Becker JH, Bax L, Amer-Wåhlin I, Ojala K, Vayssière C, Westerhuis MEMH, et al. ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram in intrapartum fetal monitoring. A meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 119: 145-54.
3. Potti S, Berghella V,. ST waveform analysis versus cardiotocography alone for intrapartum monitoring: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am J Perinatol. 2012; 29: 657-64.
4. Salmelin A, Wiklund I, Bottinga R, Brorsson B, Ekman-Ordeberg G, Eneroth Grimfors E, et al. Fetal monitoring with computerized ST analysis during labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013; 92: 28-39.
5. Schuit E, Amer-Wåhlin I, Ojala K, Vayssière C, Westerhuis MEMH, Maršál K, et al. Effectiveness of electronic fetal monitoring with additional ST analysis in vertex singleton pregnancies beyond 36 weeks of gestation: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 208: 187. e1-13.
6. Olofsson P, Ayres-de-Campos D, Kessler J, Tendal B, Yli BM, Devoe L,. A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part I: the randomized controlled trials. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014; 93: 556-69.
7. Westgate J, Harris M, Curnow JSH, Greene KR,. Plymouth randomized trial of cardiotocogram only versus ST waveform plus cardiotocogram for intrapartum monitoring in 2400 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993; 169: 1151-60.
8. Amer-Wåhlin I, Hellsten C, Norén H, Hagberg H, Herbst A, Kjellmer I, et al. Cardiotocography only versus cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram for intrapartum fetal monitoring: a Swedish randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2001; 358: 534-8.
9. Ojala K, Vääräsmäki M, Mäkikallio K, Valkama M, Tekaya A,. A comparison of intrapartum automated fetal electrocardiography and conventional cardiotocography-a randomised controlled study. BJOG. 2006; 113: 419-23.
10. Vayssière C, David E, Meyer N, Haberstich R, Sebahoun V, Roth E, et al. A French randomized controlled trial of ST-segment analysis in a population with abnormal cardiotocograms during labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 197: 299.e1-6.
11. Westerhuis MEMH, Visser GHA, Moons KGM, van Beek E, Benders MJ, Bijvoet SM, et al. Cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram compared with cardiotocography only for intrapartum monitoring. A randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115: 1173-80.
12. Amer-Wåhlin I, Kjellmer I, Marsál K, Olofsson P, Rosén KG,. Swedish randomized controlled trial of cardiotocography only versus cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram revisited: analysis of data according to standard versus modified intention-to-treat principle. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011; 90: 990-6.
13. Westerhuis MEMH, Visser GHA, Moons KGM, Zuithoff NPA, Mol BWJ, Kwee A,. Letter to the editor. Cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram compared with cardiotocography only for intrapartum monitoring: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117: 406-7.
14. Westerhuis MEMH, Visser GHA, Moons KGM, Zuithoff NPA, Mol BWJ, Kwee A,. Corrections. Cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram compared with cardiotocography only for intrapartum monitoring: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117: 412.
15. Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G,. Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. BMJ. 2010; 340: c221.
16. Ried K,. Interpreting and understanding meta-analysis graphs-a practical guide. Aust Fam Physician. 2006; 35: 635-8.
17. Devane D,. Systematic reviews. Statistical tests for heterogeneity. 27/02/2012. Available online at: www.iresearch4birth.eu/iResearch4Birth/ resources/cms/documents/Statistical-tests-for-heterogeneity-Declan-Devane.pdf (accessed February 10, 2014).
18. Huedo-Medina T, Sanchez-Meca J, Marin-Martinez F, Botella J,. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? 2006. CHIP documents. Paper 19. Available online at: http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/chip-docs/19 (accessed February 10, 2014).
19. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. Available online at: http://handbook.cochrane.org/ front-page.htm (accessed February 10, 2014).
20. StatsDirect Ltd. Available online at: http://www.statsdirect.com/webhelp/ #contents.htm%3FTocPath%3D-1 (accessed February 10, 2014).
21. Rosén KG,. ST analysis reviewed. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209: 394.
22. Schuit E,. Reply. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209: 394-5.
23. Sundström A-K, Rosén D, Rosén KG,. Fetal surveillance. Gothenburg: Neoventa Medical AB, 2000.
24. Amer-Wåhlin I, Arulkumaran S, Hagberg H, Marsál K, Visser GHA,. Fetal electrocardiogram: ST waveform analysis in intrapartum surveillance. BJOG. 2007; 114: 1191-3.
25. Welin A-K, Norén H, Odeback A, Andersson M, Andersson G, Rosén KG,. STAN, a clinical audit: the outcome of 2 years of regular use in the city of Varberg, Sweden. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007; 86: 827-32.
26. Norén H, Rosén KG,. Intrapartum ST analysis. Fetal Maternal Med Rev. 2008; 19: 325-58.
27. Wiberg N, Källén K, Olofsson P,. Base deficit estimation in umbilical cord blood is influenced by gestational age, choice of fetal fluid compartment, and algorithm for calculation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 195: 1651-6.
28. Mokarami P, Wiberg N, Olofsson P,. An overlooked aspect on metabolic acidosis at birth: blood gas analyzers calculate base deficit differently. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012; 91: 574-9.
29. Sarnat HB, Sarnat MS,. Neonatal encephalopathy following fetal distress. A clinical and electroencephalographic study. Arch Neurol. 1976; 33: 696-705.
30. Westgate JA,. An evaluation of electronic fetal monitoring with clinical validation of ST waveform analysis during labour. Thesis, University of Plymouth, 1993.