Browsing by Author "Clode, N"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Breech Presentation: Vaginal Versus Cesarean Delivery, Which Intervention Leads to the Best Outcomes?Publication . Fonseca, A; Silva, R; Rato, I; Neves, AR; Peixoto, C; Ferraz, Z; Ramalho, I; Carocha, A; Félix, N; Valdoleiros, S; Galvão, A; Gonçalves, D; Curado, J; Palma, MJ; Lobo Antunes, I; Clode, N; Graça, LINTRODUCTION: The best route of delivery for the term breech fetus is still controversial. We aim to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes between vaginal and cesarean term breech deliveries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicentric retrospective cohort study of singleton term breech fetuses delivered vaginally or by elective cesarean section from January 2012 - October 2014. Primary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity or mortality. RESULTS: Sixty five breech fetuses delivered vaginally were compared to 1262 delivered by elective cesarean. Nulliparous women were more common in the elective cesarean group (69.3% vs 24.6%; p < 0.0001). Gestational age at birth was significantly lower in the vaginal delivery group (38 ± 1 weeks vs 39 ± 0.8 weeks; p = 0.0029) as was birth weight (2928 ± 48.4 g vs 3168 ± 11.3 g; p < 0.0001). Apgar scores below seven on the first and fifth minutes were more likely in the vaginal delivery group (1st minute: 18.5% vs 5.9%; p = 0.0006; OR 3.6 [1.9 - 7.0]; 5th minute: 3.1% vs 0.2%; p = 0.0133; OR 20.0 [2.8 - 144.4]), as was fetal trauma (3.1% vs 0.3%: p = 0.031; OR 9.9 [1.8-55.6]). Neither group had cases of fetal acidemia. Admission to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, maternal postpartum hemorrhage and the incidence of other obstetric complications were similar between groups. DISCUSSION: Although vaginal breech delivery was associated with lower Apgar scores and higher incidence of fetal trauma, overall rates of such events were low. Admission to the neonatal intensive care unit and maternal outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION: Both delivery routes seem equally valid, neither posing high maternal or neonatal complications' incidence.
- Transabdominal and Transperineal Ultrasound vs Routine Care Before Instrumental Vaginal Delivery - A Randomized Controlled TrialPublication . Barros, J; Afonso, M; Martins1, AT; Carita, A; Clode, N; Ayres-de-Campos, D; Graça, LIntroduction: The role of intrapartum ultrasound as an ancillary method to instrumental vaginal delivery is yet to be determined. This study aimed to compare the use of transabdominal and transperineal ultrasound with routine clinical care before performing an instrumental vaginal delivery, regarding the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Material and methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted between October 2016 and March 2019 in two tertiary care maternity hospitals in Lisbon, Portugal. Women at term, with full cervical dilatation, singleton fetuses in cephalic presentation, and with an established indication for instrumental vaginal delivery, were approached for enrollment. After informed consent was obtained, randomization into one of two groups was carried out. In the experimental arm, women underwent transabdominal ultrasound for determination of the fetal head position and transperineal ultrasound for evaluation of the angle of progression, before instrumental vaginal delivery. In the control arm, no ultrasound was carried out before instrumental vaginal delivery. Primary outcomes were composite measures of maternal and neonatal morbidity. Composite maternal morbidity consisted of severe postpartum hemorrhage, perineal trauma, and prolonged hospital stay. Composite neonatal morbidity consisted of low 5-minute Apgar score, umbilical artery metabolic acidosis, birth trauma, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. Results: A total of 222 women were enrolled (113 in the experimental arm and 109 in the control arm). No significant differences between the two arms were found in composite measures of maternal (23.9% in the experimental group vs 22.9% in the control group, odds ratio 1.055, 95% CI 0.567-1.964) or neonatal morbidity (9.7% in the experimental group vs 6.4% in the control group, odds ratio 1.571, 95% CI 0.586-4.215), nor in any of the individual outcomes. Conclusions: In this small randomized controlled trial that was stopped for futility before reaching the required sample size, transabdominal and transperineal ultrasound performed just before instrumental vaginal delivery did not reduce the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, when compared with routine clinical care.