Literature DB >> 33090378

Review and Study of Uterine Bioelectrical Waveforms and Vector Analysis to Identify Electrical and Mechanosensitive Transduction Control Mechanisms During Labor in Pregnant Patients.

R E Garfield1, Lauren Murphy2, Kendra Gray2, Bruce Towe3.   

Abstract

The bioelectrical signals that produce uterine contractions during parturition are not completely understood. The objectives are as follows: (1) to review the literature and information concerning uterine biopotential waveforms generated by the uterus, known to produce contractions, and evaluate mechanotransduction in pregnant patients using electromyographic (EMG) recording methods and (2) to study a new approach, uterine vector analysis, commonly used for the heart: vectorcardiography analysis. The patients used in this study were as follows: (1) patients at term not in labor (n = 3); (2) patients during the 1st stage of labor at cervical dilations from 2 to 10 cm (n = 30); and (3) patients in the 2nd stage of labor and during delivery (n = 3). We used DC-coupled electrodes and PowerLab hardware (model no. PL2604, ADInstruments, Castle Hill, Australia), with software (LabChart, ADInstruments) for storage and analysis of biopotentials. Uterine and abdominal EMG recordings were made from the surface of each patient using 3 electrode pairs with 1 pair (+ and -, with a 31-cm spacing distance) placed in the right/left position (X position) and with 1 pair placed in an up/down position (Y position, also 31 cm apart) and with the third pair at the front/back (Z position). Using signals from the three X, Y, and Z electrodes, slow (0.03 to 0.1 Hz, high amplitude) and fast wave (0.3 to 1 Hz, low amplitude) biopotentials were recorded. The amplitudes of the slow waves and fast waves were significantly higher during the 2nd stage of labor compared to the 1st stage (respectively, p = 9.54 × e-3 and p = 3.94 × e-7). When 2 channels were used, for example, the X vs. Y, for 2-D vector analysis or 3 channels, X vs. Y vs. Z, for 3-D analysis, are plotted against each other on their axes, this produces a vector electromyometriogram (EMMG) that shows no directionality for fast waves and a downward direction for slow waves. Similarly, during the 2nd stage of labor during abdominal contractions ("pushing"), the slow and fast waves were enlarged. Manual applied pressure was used to evoke bioelectrical activity to examine the mechanosensitivity of the uterus. Conclusions: (1) Phasic contractility of the uterus is a product of slow waves and groups of fast waves (bursts of spikes) to produce myometrial contractile responses. (2) 2-D and 3-D uterine vector analyses (uterine vector electromyometriogram) demonstrate no directionality of small fast waves while the larger slow waves represent the downward direction of biopotentials towards the cervical opening. (3) Myometrial cell action event excitability and subsequent contractility likely amplify slow wave activity input and uterine muscle contractility via mechanotransduction systems. (4) Models illustrate the possible relationships of slow to fast waves and the association of a mechanotransduction system and pacemaker activity as observed for slow waves and pacemakers in gastrointestinal muscle. (5) The interaction of these systems is thought to regulate uterine contractility. (6) This study suggests a potential indicator of delivery time. Such vector approaches might help us predict the progress of gestation and better estimate the timing of delivery, gestational pathologies reflected in bioelectric events, and perhaps the potential for premature delivery drug and mechanical interventions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Electromyography; Labor; Myometrium; Parturition; Uterine electrical activity; Uterine mechanotransduction; Uterus; Vector electromyometriography

Year:  2020        PMID: 33090378     DOI: 10.1007/s43032-020-00358-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Sci        ISSN: 1933-7191            Impact factor:   3.060


  61 in total

1.  Wave forms of the electrohysterogram in pregnancy and labor.

Authors:  S D LARKS; K DASGUPTA
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1958-05       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 2.  The electrical activities of the uterus during pregnancy.

Authors:  Wim J E P Lammers
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 3.060

Review 3.  Physiologic basis of myometrial function.

Authors:  N C Anderson
Journal:  Semin Perinatol       Date:  1978-07       Impact factor: 3.300

4.  Regulation of activity in uterine smooth muscle.

Authors:  J M MARSHALL
Journal:  Physiol Rev Suppl       Date:  1962-07

5.  Electrical activity of the human uterus in labor; the electrohysterograph.

Authors:  C M STEER; G J HERTSCH
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1950-01       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Electromyographic observations on the human uterus during labour.

Authors:  G M Wolfs; M van Leeuwen
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl       Date:  1979

Review 7.  Uterine electromyography: a critical review.

Authors:  D Devedeux; C Marque; S Mansour; G Germain; J Duchêne
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  External recording and processing of fast electrical activity of the uterus in human parturition.

Authors:  J G Planes; J P Morucci; H Grandjean; R Favretto
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 2.602

9.  Linking myometrial physiology to intrauterine pressure; how tissue-level contractions create uterine contractions of labor.

Authors:  Roger C Young; Peter Barendse
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 4.475

10.  Identification of uterine pacemaker regions at the myometrial-placental interface in the rat.

Authors:  E Josiah Lutton; Wim J E P Lammers; Sean James; Hugo A van den Berg; Andrew M Blanks
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 5.182

View more
  1 in total

1.  Assessment of Features between Multichannel Electrohysterogram for Differentiation of Labors.

Authors:  Yajun Zhang; Dongmei Hao; Lin Yang; Xiya Zhou; Yiyao Ye-Lin; Yimin Yang
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 3.847

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.