Literature DB >> 3544665

Comparison between the conventional Malmström extractor and a new extractor with Silastic cup.

M Hammarström, G Csemiczky, P Belfrage.   

Abstract

One hundred women for whom instrumental delivery had to be performed due to fetal asphyxia or uterine inertia were randomized to a vacuum extraction with the conventional Malmström instrument or the Silastic cup of Kobayashi. With the Silastic cup, extraction time was shorter and injuries to the scalp were less common. On the other hand, extraction with the Silastic cup failed more often, especially in occiput posterior position. There were no differences in Apgar scores between the two groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3544665     DOI: 10.3109/00016348609161502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  3 in total

Review 1.  Instruments for assisted vaginal birth.

Authors:  Ganga L Verma; Jessica J Spalding; Marc D Wilkinson; G Justus Hofmeyr; Valerie Vannevel; Fidelma O'Mahony
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-24

Review 2.  Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review.

Authors:  Emily J Hotton; Sophie Renwick; Erik Lenguerrand; Julia Wade; Tim J Draycott; Joanna F Crofts; Natalie S Blencowe
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 2.435

3.  Clinical impact of the disposable ventouse iCup® versus a metallic vacuum cup: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Véronique Equy; Sandra David-Tchouda; Michel Dreyfus; Didier Riethmuller; Françoise Vendittelli; Victoire Cabaud; Bruno Langer; Jennifer Margier; Jean-Luc Bosson; Jean-Patrick Schaal
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 3.007

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.