Warwick Medical School (Al Wattar, Honess, Bunnewell, Quenby), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK; Reproductive Medicine Unit (Al Wattar), University College London Hospitals, London, UK; Population Health Sciences (Welton), Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; University Hospital of Coventry and Warwickshire (Quenby), Coventry, UK; Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health (Khan), University of Granada, Granada, Spain; Clinical Biostatistics Unit, Ramon y Cajal Hospital (IRYCIS) and CIBER Epidemiology and Public Health (Khan, Zamora), Madrid, Spain; CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP) (Zamora), Madrid, Spain; WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research (Thangaratinam), University of Birmingham; Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust (Thangaratinam), Birmingham, UK
Warwick Medical School (Al Wattar, Honess, Bunnewell, Quenby), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK; Reproductive Medicine Unit (Al Wattar), University College London Hospitals, London, UK; Population Health Sciences (Welton), Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; University Hospital of Coventry and Warwickshire (Quenby), Coventry, UK; Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health (Khan), University of Granada, Granada, Spain; Clinical Biostatistics Unit, Ramon y Cajal Hospital (IRYCIS) and CIBER Epidemiology and Public Health (Khan, Zamora), Madrid, Spain; CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP) (Zamora), Madrid, Spain; WHO Collaborating Centre for Global Women's Health, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research (Thangaratinam), University of Birmingham; Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust (Thangaratinam), Birmingham, UK.
CMAJ. 2021 Apr 6;193(14):E468-E477. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.202538.
Cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure worldwide. Intrapartum fetal surveillance is routinely offered to improve neonatal outcomes, but the effects of different methods on the risk of emergency cesarean deliveries remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of fetal surveillance.
We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL until June 1, 2020, for randomized trials evaluating any intrapartum fetal surveillance method. We performed a network meta-analysis within a frequentist framework. We assessed the quality and network inconsistency of trials. We reported primarily on intrapartum emergency cesarean deliveries and other secondary maternal and neonatal outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
We included 33 trials (118 863 patients) evaluating intermittent auscultation with Pinard stethoscope/handheld Doppler (IA), cardiotocography (CTG), computerized cardiotocography (cCTG), CTG with fetal scalp lactate (CTG-lactate), CTG with fetal scalp pH analysis (CTG-FBS), CTG with fetal pulse oximetry (FPO-CTG), CTG with fetal heart electrocardiogram (CTG-STAN) and their combinations. Intermittent auscultation reduced the risk of emergency cesarean deliveries compared with other types of surveillance (IA v. CTG: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.97; IA v. CTG-FBS: RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.80; IA v.CTG-lactate: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.92; IA v. FPO-CTG: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65-0.87; IA v.FPO-CTG-FBS: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.99; cCTG-FBS v. IA: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.42), except STAN-CTG-FBS (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98-1.40). There was a similar reduction observed for emergency cesarean deliveries for fetal distress. None of the evaluated methods was associated with a reduced risk of neonatal acidemia, neonatal unit admissions, Apgar scores or perinatal death.
Compared with other types of fetal surveillance, intermittent auscultation seems to reduce emergency cesarean deliveries in labour without increasing adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes.
剖宫产是全球最常见的手术。产时胎儿监护常规用于改善新生儿结局,但不同方法对紧急剖宫产风险的影响仍不确定。我们进行了一项系统评价和网络荟萃分析,以评估不同类型的胎儿监护的效果。
我们检索了 MEDLINE、Embase 和 CENTRAL 数据库,截至 2020 年 6 月 1 日,以评估任何产时胎儿监护方法的随机试验。我们在一个似然法框架内进行了网络荟萃分析。我们评估了试验的质量和网络不一致性。我们主要使用风险比(RR)和 95%置信区间(CI)报告产时紧急剖宫产和其他次要母婴结局。
我们纳入了 33 项试验(118863 例患者),评估了间断听诊与 Pinard 听诊器/手持多普勒(IA)、胎心监护(CTG)、计算机胎心监护(cCTG)、胎心监护加胎儿头皮乳酸(CTG-lactate)、胎心监护加胎儿头皮 pH 分析(CTG-FBS)、胎心监护加胎儿脉搏血氧饱和度(FPO-CTG)、胎心监护加胎儿心电图(CTG-STAN)及其组合。与其他监测方法相比,间断听诊降低了紧急剖宫产的风险(IA 与 CTG:RR 0.83,95%CI 0.72-0.97;IA 与 CTG-FBS:RR 0.71,95%CI 0.63-0.80;IA 与 CTG-lactate:RR 0.77,95%CI 0.64-0.92;IA 与 FPO-CTG:RR 0.75,95%CI 0.65-0.87;IA 与 FPO-CTG-FBS:RR 0.81,95%CI 0.67-0.99;cCTG-FBS 与 IA:RR 1.21,95%CI 1.04-1.42),但 STAN-CTG-FBS 除外(RR 1.17,95%CI 0.98-1.40)。对于胎儿窘迫引起的紧急剖宫产,也观察到类似的降低。评估的方法均与新生儿酸中毒、新生儿入住率、阿普加评分或围产儿死亡的风险降低无关。
与其他类型的胎儿监护相比,间断听诊似乎可以降低分娩时的紧急剖宫产率,而不会增加不良的新生儿和产妇结局。