Repository logo
 
Publication

Transabdominal and Transperineal Ultrasound vs Routine Care Before Instrumental Vaginal Delivery - A Randomized Controlled Trial

dc.contributor.authorBarros, J
dc.contributor.authorAfonso, M
dc.contributor.authorMartins1, AT
dc.contributor.authorCarita, A
dc.contributor.authorClode, N
dc.contributor.authorAyres-de-Campos, D
dc.contributor.authorGraça, L
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-15T14:58:01Z
dc.date.available2022-07-15T14:58:01Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: 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.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.citationActa Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021 Jun;100(6):1075-1081.pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/aogs.14065pt_PT
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4141
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherWileypt_PT
dc.subjectMAC OBSpt_PT
dc.subjectAdultpt_PT
dc.subjectFemalept_PT
dc.subjectHumanspt_PT
dc.subjectInfant, Newbornpt_PT
dc.subjectLabor Presentationpt_PT
dc.subjectLabor Stage, Second / physiology*pt_PT
dc.subjectPregnancypt_PT
dc.subjectObstetric Labor Complications / epidemiologypt_PT
dc.subjectPregnancy Outcome / epidemiology*pt_PT
dc.subjectUltrasonography, Prenatal / methods*pt_PT
dc.subjectUmbilical Arteries / diagnostic imagingpt_PT
dc.subjectVacuum Extraction, Obstetrical / methods*pt_PT
dc.titleTransabdominal and Transperineal Ultrasound vs Routine Care Before Instrumental Vaginal Delivery - A Randomized Controlled Trialpt_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage1081pt_PT
oaire.citation.startPage1075pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavicapt_PT
oaire.citation.volume100pt_PT
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
AOGScand 2021 1075.pdf
Size:
360.48 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections