Michael A Belfort1, George R Saade, Elizabeth Thom, Sean C Blackwell, Uma M Reddy, John M Thorp, Alan T N Tita, Russell S Miller, Alan M Peaceman, David S McKenna, Edward K S Chien, Dwight J Rouse, Ronald S Gibbs, Yasser Y El-Sayed, Yoram Sorokin, Steve N Caritis, J Peter VanDorsten. 1. From the University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City (M.A.B.); University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston (G.R.S.); the George Washington University Biostatistics Center, Washington, DC (E.T.); the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston-Children's Memorial Hermann Hospital, Houston (S.C.B.); the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD (U.M.R.); University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill (J.M.T.); University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham (A.T.N.T.); Columbia University, New York (R.S.M.); Northwestern University, Chicago (A.M.P.); Ohio State University, Columbus (D.S.M.); MetroHealth Medical Center-Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland (E.K.S.C.); Brown University, Providence, RI (D.J.R.); University of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora (R.S.G.); Stanford University, Stanford, CA (Y.Y.E.-S.); Wayne State University, Detroit (Y.S.); University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (S.N.C.); and Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (J.P.V.D.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether using fetal electrocardiographic (ECG) ST-segment analysis as an adjunct to conventional intrapartum electronic fetal heart-rate monitoring modifies intrapartum and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We performed a multicenter trial in which women with a singleton fetus who were attempting vaginal delivery at more than 36 weeks of gestation and who had cervical dilation of 2 to 7 cm were randomly assigned to "open" or "masked" monitoring with fetal ST-segment analysis. The masked system functioned as a normal fetal heart-rate monitor. The open system displayed additional information for use when uncertain fetal heart-rate patterns were detected. The primary outcome was a composite of intrapartum fetal death, neonatal death, an Apgar score of 3 or less at 5 minutes, neonatal seizure, an umbilical-artery blood pH of 7.05 or less with a base deficit of 12 mmol per liter or more, intubation for ventilation at delivery, or neonatal encephalopathy. RESULTS:A total of 11,108 patients underwent randomization; 5532 were assigned to the open group, and 5576 to the masked group. The primary outcome occurred in 52 fetuses or neonates of women in the open group (0.9%) and 40 fetuses or neonates of women in the masked group (0.7%) (relative risk, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.98; P=0.20). Among the individual components of the primary outcome, only the frequency of a 5-minute Apgar score of 3 or less differed significantly between neonates of women in the open group and those in the masked group (0.3% vs. 0.1%, P=0.02). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of cesarean delivery (16.9% and 16.2%, respectively; P=0.30) or any operative delivery (22.8% and 22.0%, respectively; P=0.31). Adverse events were rare and occurred with similar frequency in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fetal ECG ST-segment analysis used as an adjunct to conventional intrapartum electronic fetal heart-rate monitoring did not improve perinatal outcomes or decrease operative-delivery rates. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and Neoventa Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01131260.).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether using fetal electrocardiographic (ECG) ST-segment analysis as an adjunct to conventional intrapartum electronic fetal heart-rate monitoring modifies intrapartum and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We performed a multicenter trial in which women with a singleton fetus who were attempting vaginal delivery at more than 36 weeks of gestation and who had cervical dilation of 2 to 7 cm were randomly assigned to "open" or "masked" monitoring with fetal ST-segment analysis. The masked system functioned as a normal fetal heart-rate monitor. The open system displayed additional information for use when uncertain fetal heart-rate patterns were detected. The primary outcome was a composite of intrapartum fetal death, neonatal death, an Apgar score of 3 or less at 5 minutes, neonatal seizure, an umbilical-artery blood pH of 7.05 or less with a base deficit of 12 mmol per liter or more, intubation for ventilation at delivery, or neonatal encephalopathy. RESULTS: A total of 11,108 patients underwent randomization; 5532 were assigned to the open group, and 5576 to the masked group. The primary outcome occurred in 52 fetuses or neonates of women in the open group (0.9%) and 40 fetuses or neonates of women in the masked group (0.7%) (relative risk, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.98; P=0.20). Among the individual components of the primary outcome, only the frequency of a 5-minute Apgar score of 3 or less differed significantly between neonates of women in the open group and those in the masked group (0.3% vs. 0.1%, P=0.02). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of cesarean delivery (16.9% and 16.2%, respectively; P=0.30) or any operative delivery (22.8% and 22.0%, respectively; P=0.31). Adverse events were rare and occurred with similar frequency in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fetal ECG ST-segment analysis used as an adjunct to conventional intrapartum electronic fetal heart-rate monitoring did not improve perinatal outcomes or decrease operative-delivery rates. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and Neoventa Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01131260.).
Authors: I Amer-Wåhlin; C Hellsten; H Norén; H Hagberg; A Herbst; I Kjellmer; H Lilja; C Lindoff; M Månsson; L Mårtensson; P Olofsson; A Sundström; K Marsál Journal: Lancet Date: 2001-08-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ewoud Schuit; Isis Amer-Wahlin; Kati Ojala; Christophe Vayssière; Michelle E M H Westerhuis; Karel Maršál; Aydin Tekay; George R Saade; Gerard H A Visser; Rolf H H Groenwold; Karel G M Moons; Ben Willem J Mol; Anneke Kwee Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Dirk Hoyer; Jan Żebrowski; Dirk Cysarz; Hernâni Gonçalves; Adelina Pytlik; Célia Amorim-Costa; João Bernardes; Diogo Ayres-de-Campos; Otto W Witte; Ekkehard Schleußner; Lisa Stroux; Christopher Redman; Antoniya Georgieva; Stephen Payne; Gari Clifford; Maria G Signorini; Giovanni Magenes; Fernando Andreotti; Hagen Malberg; Sebastian Zaunseder; Igor Lakhno; Uwe Schneider Journal: Physiol Meas Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 2.833
Authors: Mary E D'Alton; Alexander M Friedman; Peter S Bernstein; Haywood L Brown; William M Callaghan; Steven L Clark; William A Grobman; Sarah J Kilpatrick; Daniel F O'Keeffe; Douglas M Montgomery; Sindhu K Srinivas; George D Wendel; Katharine D Wenstrom; Michael R Foley Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-03-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: M-A Gatellier; J De Jonckheere; L Storme; V Houfflin-Debarge; L Ghesquiere; C Garabedian Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Irwin M Feuerstein; Marjorie R Jenkins; Susan G Kornstein; Michael S Lauer; Pamela E Scott; Tonse N K Raju; Tamara Johnson; Stephanie Devaney; Milena Lolic; Marsha Henderson; Janine Austin Clayton Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Antoniya Georgieva; Patrice Abry; Václav Chudáček; Petar M Djurić; Martin G Frasch; René Kok; Christopher A Lear; Sebastiaan N Lemmens; Inês Nunes; Aris T Papageorghiou; Gerald J Quirk; Christopher W G Redman; Barry Schifrin; Jiri Spilka; Austin Ugwumadu; Rik Vullings Journal: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 3.636