Literature DB >> 17470595

Monitoring contractions in obese parturients: electrohysterography compared with traditional monitoring.

Tammy Y Euliano1, Minh Tam Nguyen, Dorothee Marossero, Rodney K Edwards.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare electrohysterogram-derived contractions with both tocodynamometry and intrauterine pressure monitoring in obese laboring women.
METHODS: From a large database of laboring patients with electrohysterogram monitoring, obese subjects were selected in whom data were recorded for at least 30 minutes before and after intrauterine pressure catheter placement for obstetric indication. Using a contraction detection algorithm, the relationship between the methods was determined with regard to both frequency and contraction duration.
RESULTS: Of the 25 subjects (median body mass index 39.6 [25th percentile 36.5, 75th percentile 46.3]), seven underwent amniotomy at the time of intrauterine pressure catheter placement. Tocodynamometry identified 248 contractions compared with 336 by electrohysterography, whereas intrauterine pressure catheter monitoring identified 319 contractions compared with 342 by electrohysterography. Using the Contractions Consistency Index, electrohysterogram contraction detection correlated better with the intrauterine pressure catheter (0.94+/-0.06) than with tocodynamometry (0.77+/-0.25), P=.004. Electrohysterogram-derived contraction lengths closely approximated those calculated from the intrauterine pressure catheter signal.
CONCLUSION: Contraction monitoring routinely is employed for managing labor, and tocodynamometry may be unreliable in obese parturients. In the obese women in this study, the electrohysterogram-derived contraction pattern correlated better with the intrauterine pressure catheter than tocodynamometry. Electrohysterography may provide another noninvasive means of monitoring labor, particularly for those women in whom tocodynamometry is inadequate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17470595     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000258799.24496.93

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  6 in total

1.  Monitoring uterine activity during labor: a comparison of 3 methods.

Authors:  Tammy Y Euliano; Minh Tam Nguyen; Shalom Darmanjian; Susan P McGorray; Neil Euliano; Allison Onkala; Anthony R Gregg
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-10-23       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Non-invasive Fetal Electrocardiography for Intrapartum Cardiotocography.

Authors:  Rik Vullings; Judith O E H van Laar
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 3.418

3.  A Novel, Cardiac-Derived Algorithm for Uterine Activity Monitoring in a Wearable Remote Device.

Authors:  Muhammad Mhajna; Boaz Sadeh; Simcha Yagel; Christof Sohn; Nadav Schwartz; Steven Warsof; Yael Zahar; Amit Reches
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-07-19

4.  Complications associated with insertion of intrauterine pressure catheters: an unusual case of uterine hypertonicity and uterine perforation resulting in fetal distress after insertion of an intrauterine pressure catheter.

Authors:  Kara M Rood
Journal:  Case Rep Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-08-13

5.  Automatic identification of motion artifacts in EHG recording for robust analysis of uterine contractions.

Authors:  Yiyao Ye-Lin; Javier Garcia-Casado; Gema Prats-Boluda; José Alberola-Rubio; Alfredo Perales
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 2.238

6.  A Comparative Study of Vaginal Labor and Caesarean Section Postpartum Uterine Myoelectrical Activity.

Authors:  Alba Diaz-Martinez; Javier Mas-Cabo; Gema Prats-Boluda; Javier Garcia-Casado; Karen Cardona-Urrego; Rogelio Monfort-Ortiz; Angel Lopez-Corral; Maria De Arriba-Garcia; Alfredo Perales; Yiyao Ye-Lin
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 3.576

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.