Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2020
Foetal scalp blood sampling and ST-analysis of the foetal ECG for intrapartum foetal monitoring: a restricted systematic review.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Demaegd Hmi, Bauters Egr, Page G H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To investigate if foetal scalp blood sampling (FBS) is useful in preventing foetal metabolic acidosis in labour when ST-analysis of the foetal ECG (STAN ® ) is already being used as a second line technique for intrapartum foetal monitoring with cardiotocography (CTG).
DESIGN: Restricted systematic review.
METHODS: Based on a literature search in July 2019, a restricted systematic review was performed. Studies comparing CTG+STAN ® +FBS with CTG+STAN ® , CTG+FBS or CTG only were included. Observational studies allowing FBS in addition to STAN ® reporting the indications, results and neonatal outcomes were included as well.
RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials (RCT) and seven observational trials were analysed. Based on the analysis of data coming from one RCT, FBS identifies foetal acidosis in 9.9% when performed in specific situations. Similarly, in observational trials it was found that in up to 10% of cases where STAN ® registration was less reliable, FBS suggested foetal acidosis. However, there is no evidence that FBS in these cases was capable of preventing metabolic acidosis or its neurological consequences.
CONCLUSION: Based on the available literature, no recommendations in favour of combining FBS with STAN ® monitoring can be made.
DESIGN: Restricted systematic review.
METHODS: Based on a literature search in July 2019, a restricted systematic review was performed. Studies comparing CTG+STAN ® +FBS with CTG+STAN ® , CTG+FBS or CTG only were included. Observational studies allowing FBS in addition to STAN ® reporting the indications, results and neonatal outcomes were included as well.
RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials (RCT) and seven observational trials were analysed. Based on the analysis of data coming from one RCT, FBS identifies foetal acidosis in 9.9% when performed in specific situations. Similarly, in observational trials it was found that in up to 10% of cases where STAN ® registration was less reliable, FBS suggested foetal acidosis. However, there is no evidence that FBS in these cases was capable of preventing metabolic acidosis or its neurological consequences.
CONCLUSION: Based on the available literature, no recommendations in favour of combining FBS with STAN ® monitoring can be made.