Desurmont S, Houzé de l'Aulnoit A, Brabant G, Houzé de l'Aulnoit D
Lille Catholic Hospitals, Obstetrics Department, Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
Lille Catholic Hospitals, Obstetrics Department, Lille Catholic University, Lille, France.
J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2018 Sep;47(7):317-324. doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.05.003. Epub 2018 May 21.
Engagement of the fetal head is a determinant element when deciding on operative vaginal delivery. In routine practice, engagement is a clinical diagnosis based on transvaginal digital examination. Transperineal ultrasound might provide complementary information useful for measuring the fetal head-perineum distance (HPD). The purpose of this work was to determine the cutoff HPD distinguishing engagement from non-engagement.
This single-center prospective study approved by the institutional review board was conducted between December 25, 2012 and August 31, 2015 in 411 nulliparous women; 20 did not provide informed consent and were excluded; analysis concerned 391 patients. Clinical diagnosis - engagement or non-engagement depending on results of the transvaginal digital examination (Farabeuf's and Demelin's signs) - was compared with the ultrasound HPD measurement.
The clinical diagnosis was non-engagement at complete dilatation in 96 patients (24.6%). The cutoff HPD distinguishing between engagement and non-engagement was 57mm (AUC 83.5% [95%CI 79.3-87.8]), with 75.0% [65.5-82.6] sensitivity, 75.9% [70.7-80.5] specificity, 50.3% [42.2-58.4] positive predictive value, and 90.3% [86.0-93.4] negative predictive value.
In this series, the HPD cutoff distinguishing between engagement and non-engagement was 57mm. Below this cutoff level, the head should be considered engaged, beyond non-engaged. Nevertheless, the pertinence of this cutoff level is hampered by the imprecision of the gold standard used for the clinical diagnosis (transvaginal digital examination). In case of doubt, we recommend, in addition to considering the obstetrical setting, to combine transperineal ultrasound with transvaginal digital examination to avoid deleterious failure of operative vaginal delivery.
决定经阴道助产时,胎头入盆是一个决定性因素。在常规实践中,入盆是基于经阴道指诊的临床诊断。经会阴超声可能会提供有助于测量胎头与会阴距离(HPD)的补充信息。本研究的目的是确定区分入盆与未入盆的HPD临界值。
本单中心前瞻性研究经机构审查委员会批准,于2012年12月25日至2015年8月31日在411例初产妇中进行;20例未提供知情同意书,被排除在外;分析涉及391例患者。根据经阴道指诊结果(法腊布夫征和德梅林征)进行临床诊断(入盆或未入盆),并与超声测量的HPD进行比较。
96例患者(24.6%)在宫口开全时临床诊断为未入盆。区分入盆与未入盆的HPD临界值为57mm(曲线下面积83.5%[95%可信区间79.3 - 87.8]),敏感性为75.0%[65.5 - 82.6],特异性为75.9%[70.7 - 80.5],阳性预测值为50.3%[42.2 - 58.4],阴性预测值为90.3%[86.0 - 93.4]。
在本系列研究中,区分入盆与未入盆的HPD临界值为57mm。低于此临界值,应认为胎头已入盆;高于此值,则未入盆。然而,该临界值的相关性受到临床诊断所采用金标准(经阴道指诊)不精确性的影响。如有疑问,我们建议,除考虑产科情况外,将经会阴超声与经阴道指诊相结合,以避免经阴道助产的有害失败。