Ultrasound criteria for estimating the duration of spontaneous vaginal deliveries
Objective. To determine the ultrasound indices reflecting the course of normal delivery.Prikhodko A.M., Romanov A.Yu., Baev O.R.
Subjects and methods. The investigation enrolled 120 patients with full-term singleton pregnancy. All the vaginal deliveries were uncomplicated. Ultrasound examination estimated the angle of progression (AoP), head progression distance (PD), head-symphysis distance (HSD), and head-perineum distance (HPD) in the latent and active phases of the first and second stages of labor.
Results. In the latent phase of the first labor stage, AoP was 98.8° with a 24.2% increase by the beginning of the second stage of labor. PD was 1.67 cm with a 110.8% increase in the second stage; HSD was 5.6 cm, with a 35.9% reduction in the second period; HPD was 4.25 cm, with a 46.6% decrease. In active labor stage, there was a slight positive correlation between the time to the end of delivery and HPD (r = 0.298; p = 0.046). In the second labor stage, there was a moderate positive correlation between the time to the end of delivery and HPD (r = 0.400;
p = 0.043) and a negative one between the former and PD (r = -0.514; p = 0.021).
Conclusion. AoP, PD, HPD, and HSD, which are estimated in the first stage of labor, are not informative for predicting its duration. In the second stage of labor, PD and HPD show a significant relationship to the duration of labor, which allows them to be used for assessment of the course of delivery.
Keywords
ultrasound during labor
angle of progression (AoP)
progression distance (PD)
head-perineum distance (HPD)
head-symphysis distance (HSD)
References
- Dupuis O., Silveira R., Zentner A., Dittmar A., Gaucherand P., Cucherat M. et al. Birth simulator: Reliability of transvaginal assessment of fetal head station as defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists classification. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2005; 192(3): 868-74. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.09.028.
- Dupuis O., Ruimark S., Corinne D., Simone T., André D., René-Charles R. Fetal head position during the second stage of labor: comparison of digital vaginal examination and transabdominal ultrasonographic examination. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2005; 123(2): 193-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.04.009.
- Tutschek B., Torkildsen E.A., Eggebø T.M. Comparison between ultrasound parameters and clinical examination to assess fetal head station in labor. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 41(4): 425-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.12422.
- Bultez T., Quibel T., Bouhanna P., Popowski T., Resche-Rigon M., Rozenberg P. Angle of fetal head progression measured using transperineal ultrasound as a predictive factor of vacuum extraction failure. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 48(1): 86-91. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.14951.
- Sainz J.A., Borrero C., Aquise A., Serrano R., Gutiérrez L., Fernández-Palacín A. Utility of intrapartum transperineal ultrasound to predict cases of failure in vacuum extraction attempt and need of cesarean section to complete delivery. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016; 29(8): 1348-52.https://dx.doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2015.1048680.
- Ghi T., Eggebø T., Lees C., Kalache K., Rozenberg P., Youssef A. et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: intrapartum ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 52(1): 128-39. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.19072.
- Rayburn W.F., Siemers K.H., Legino L.J., Nabity M.R., Anderson J.C., Patil K.D. Dystocia in late labor: determining fetal position by clinical and ultrasonic techniques. Am. J. Perinatol. 1989; 6(3): 316-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-999602.
- Barbera A.F., Pombar X., Peruginoj G., Lezotte D.C., Hobbins J.C. A new method to assess fetal head descent in labor with transperineal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2009; 33(3): 313-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.6329.
- Приходько А.М., Романов А.Ю., Баев О.Р. Ультразвуковая оценка положения головки плода в родах. Акушерство и гинекология. 2019; 3: 5-9 [Prikhodko A.M., Romanov A.Yu., Baev O.R. Ultrasonic assessment of fetal head during childbirth. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2019; 3: 5-9. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2019.3.5-9.
- Приходько А.М., Романов А.Ю., Баев О.Р. Ультразвуковое исследование в родах: техника и практическое применение. Акушерство и гинекология. 2019; 6: 151-4. [Prikhodko A.M., Romanov A.Yu., Baev O.R. Ultrasound in labor: technique and practical application. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2019; 6: 151-4. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2019.6.151-154.
- Dietz H.P., Lanzarone V., Simpson J.M. Predicting operative delivery. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2006; 27(4): 409-15. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.2731.
- Tutschek B., Torkildsen E.A., Eggebø T.M. Comparison between ultrasound parameters and clinical examination to assess fetal head station in labor. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 41(4): 425-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.12422.
- Ghi T., Maroni E., Youssef A., Morselli-Labate A.M., Paccapelo A., Montaguti E. et al. Sonographic pattern of fetal head descent: Relationship with duration of active second stage of labor and occiput position at delivery. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 44(1): 82-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.13324.
- Tutschek B., Braun T., Chantraine F., Henrich W. A study of progress of labour using intrapartum translabial ultrasound, assessing head station, direction, and angle of descent. BJOG. 2011; 118(1): 62-9. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02775.x.
- Torkildsen E.A., Salvesen K.Å., Eggebø T.M. Prediction of delivery mode with transperineal ultrasound in women with prolonged first stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 37(6): 702-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.8951.
- Youssef A., Maroni E., Ragusa A., De Musso F., Salsi G., Iammarino M.T. et al. Fetal head-symphysis distance: a simple and reliable ultrasound index of fetal head station in labor. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 41(4): 419-24. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.12335.
Received 27.04.2020
Accepted 08.05.2020
About the Authors
Andrey M. Prikhodko, PhD, physician of the maternity department, V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology,Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. Tel.: +7(495)438-30-47. E-mail: a_prikhodko@oparina4.ru. 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
Andrey Yu. Romanov, clinical resident, V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. Tel.: +7(903)158-94-00. E-mail: romanov1553@yandex.ru. 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
Oleg R. Baev, MD, Professor, Head of Maternity Department, V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation; professor of the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, Perinatology, and Reproductology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. Tel: +7(495)438-11-88. E-mail: o_baev@oparina4.ru. 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
For citation: Prikhodko A.M., Romanov A.Yu., Baev O.R. Ultrasound criteria for estimating the duration of spontaneous vaginal deliveries.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/ Obstetrics and gynecology. 2020; 10: 135-140 (in Russian)
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2020.10.135-140
Similar Articles
