Quantitative cardiotocography to improve fetal assessment during labor: a preliminary randomized controlled trial

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

Volumn 205, Issue , 2016, Pages 91-97

  Ignatov, Petar N ^a,b   Lutomski, Jennifer E ^c,d  

^a Second Municipal Hospital for Obstetrics and Gynecology Sheynovo   (Bulgaria)

^b Orthogyn Medical Center   (Bulgaria)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

^d RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Acidemia; Cardiotocography; Cesarean section; Clinical decision support systems; Fetal hypoxia

Indexed keywords

ACIDEMIA; ADULT; ADVERSE OUTCOME; APGAR SCORE; ARTICLE; BLOOD PH; BLOOD SAMPLING; BULGARIA; CARDIOTOCOGRAPH; CARDIOTOCOGRAPHY; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FEMALE; FETUS; FETUS BLOOD; FETUS HYPOXIA; FETUS MONITORING; FORCEPS DELIVERY; HUMAN; INFANTILE SPASM; LABOR; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NEONATAL INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE CARDIOTOCOGRAPHY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK FACTOR; RISK REDUCTION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TERTIARY CARE CENTER; UMBILICAL ARTERY; ACIDOSIS; CLINICAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FETAL DISTRESS; FETUS HEART RATE; NEWBORN; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES; YOUNG ADULT;

ACIDOSIS; ADULT; CARDIOTOCOGRAPHY; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; FEMALE; FETAL DISTRESS; FETAL MONITORING; HEART RATE, FETAL; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; LABOR, OBSTETRIC; PREGNANCY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84983740964     PISSN: 03012115     EISSN: 18727654     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.08.023     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. [1] Chauhan, S.P., Klauser, C.K., Woodring, T.C., Sanderson, M., Magann, E.F., Morrison, J.C., Intrapartum nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing and prediction of adverse outcomes: interobserver variability. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 199, 2008, 623 e1–5.
2. [2] Devane, D., Lalor, J., Midwives’ visual interpretation of intrapartum cardiotocographs: intra- and inter-observer agreement. J Adv Nurs 52 (2005), 133–141.
3. [3] Figueras, F., Albela, S., Bonino, S., et al. Visual analysis of antepartum fetal heart rate tracings: inter- and intra-observer agreement and impact of knowledge of neonatal outcome. J Perinat Med 33 (2005), 241–245.
4. [4] Blix, E., Sviggum, O., Koss, K.S., Oian, P., Inter-observer variation in assessment of 845 labour admission tests: comparison between midwives and obstetricians in the clinical setting and two experts. BJOG 110 (2003), 1–5.
5. [5] Ayres-de-Campos, D., Bernardes, J., Costa-Pereira, A., Pereira-Leite, L., Inconsistencies in classification by experts of cardiotocograms and subsequent clinical decision. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 106 (1999), 1307–1310.
6. [6] Lutomski, J.E., Meaney, S., Greene, R.A., Ryan, A.C., Devane, D., Expert systems for fetal assessment in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(4), 2015, 10.1002/14651858.cd010708.pub2 [Art. No.: CD010708].
7. [7] East, C.E., Chan, F.Y., Colditz, P.B., Begg, L.M., Fetal pulse oximetry for fetal assessment in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(10), 2014, 10.1002/14651858.CD004075.pub4 [CD004075].
8. [8] East, C.E., Leader, L.R., Sheehan, P., Henshall, N.E., Colditz, P.B., Intrapartum fetal scalp lactate sampling for fetal assessment in the presence of a non-reassuring fetal heart rate trace. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(10), 2012, 10.1002/14651858.CD006174.pub2 [CD006174].
9. [9] Neilson, J.P., Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 4, 2012 [CD000116].
10. [10] Brocklehurst, P.A., A multicentre randomised controlled trial of an intelligent system to support decision making in the management of labour using the cardiotocogram (INFANT). Curr Control Trials, 2013 www.controlledtrials.com/mrct [accessed 06.09.14].
11. [11] Ayres-de-Campos, D., Ugwumadu, A., Banfield, P., et al. A randomised clinical trial of intrapartum fetal monitoring with computer analysis and alerts versus previously available monitoring. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 10, 2010, 71.
12. [12] Schiermeier, S., Pildner von Steinburg, S., Thieme, A., et al. Sensitivity and specificity of intrapartum computerised FIGO criteria for cardiotocography and fetal scalp pH during labour: multicentre, observational study. BJOG 115 (2008), 1557–1563.
13. [13] Costa, A., Santos, C., Ayres-de-Campos, D., Costa, C., Bernardes, J., Access to computerised analysis of intrapartum cardiotocographs improves clinicians’ prediction of newborn umbilical artery blood pH. BJOG 117 (2010), 1288–1293.
14. [14] Greene, K.R., Intelligent fetal heart rate computer systems in intrapartum surveillance. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 8 (1996), 123–127.
15. [15] Ignatov, P., Atanasov, B., Indirect standard cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus indirect quantitative cardiotocography—a randomized comparative study in intrapartum monitoring. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 51 (2012), 3–10.
16. [16] Roemer, V.M., CTG: microfluctuation. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol 208 (2004), 210–219.
17. [17] Roemer, V.M., Walden, R., Quantitative Cardiotocography—what does it look like and what can we expect. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol 210 (2006), 77–91.
18. [18] Ignatov, P., Atanasov, B., Kostov, I., Velev, R., Kovacheva, A., Dobreva, A., A comparative study of the prognostic pH values of the fetus in utero, generated by the quantitative cardiotocography computer method, and the actual pH values measured immediately after delivery. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 49 (2010), 3–11.
19. [19] Ignatov, P., Atanasov, B., Structure and function of the cardiotocographic score (CTG-score) calculated by the quantitative cardiotocography computer method. Determining the significance of its components for the accuracy of the estimates for the ph of the fetus. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 50 (2011), 13–20.
20. [20] Ignatov, P., Atanasov, B., Quantitative cardiotocography—clinical practice guideline. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 50 (2011), 3–9.
21. [21] Su, L.L., Chong, Y.S., Biswas, A., Use of fetal electrocardiogram for intrapartum monitoring. Ann Acad Med Singap 36 (2007), 416–420.
22. [22] International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Intrapartum surveillance: recommendations on current practice and overview of new developments. FIGO Study Group on the Assessment of New Technology. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 49 (1995), 213–221.
23. [23] Brown, V.A., Sawers, R.S., Parsons, R.J., Duncan, S.L., Cooke, I.D., The value of antenatal cardiotocography in the management of high-risk pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 89 (1982), 716–722.
24. [24] Goeschen, K., Derzeitiger Stand der intrapartalen U berwachung des Kindes. Gynakologe, 30, 1997.
25. [25] Schneider, H., Evaluation des CTG. Krit Eval CTG 29 (1996), 3–11 [German].
26. [26] Seelbach-Göbel, B., Huch, R., Luttkus, A., Saling, E., Vetter, K., Ist die Pulsoxymetrie ein Gewinn für die überwachung des Feten sub partu?. Perinatalmedizin 10 (1998), 77–80 [German].
27. [27] Steer, P.J., Eigbe, F., Lissauer, T.J., Beard, R.W., Interrelationships among abnormal cardiotocograms in labor, meconium staining of the amniotic fluid, arterial cord blood pH, and Apgar scores. Obstet Gynecol 74 (1989), 715–721.
28. [28] Murphy, K.W., Johnson, P., Moorcraft, J., Pattinson, R., Russell, V., Turnbull, A., Birth asphyxia and the intrapartum cardiotocograph. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97 (1990), 470–479.
29. [29] Axt, R., Das intrapartale CTG. Gynakologe 30 (1997), 577–580 [German].
30. [30] Halpern, S.D., Karlawish, J.H., Berlin, J.A., The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials. JAMA 288 (2002), 358–362.
31. [31] Konstantinov, S., Zlatkov, V., Types of hospital property and the relative rate of cesarean section occurrence. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 54 (2015), 8–13.
32. [32] Dimitrov, A., Tsankova, M., Krusteva, K., Nikolov, A., Study of women preference regarding mode of delivery. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 43 (2004), 13–17.