Clark S L, Paul R H
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Dec 1;153(7):717-20. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(85)90330-8.
Continuous electronic fetal heart rate monitoring and fetal scalp blood sampling have traditionally played a complementary role in intrapartum fetal surveillance. Nevertheless, biochemical assessment of fetal blood pH, with the use of scalp or umbilical cord blood, is often viewed as the "gold standard" against which biophysical indicators of fetal distress must be judged. In actual clinical practice, however, fetal scalp blood sampling is only rarely used. In addition, there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that, when properly interpreted, fetal heart rate assessment may be equal or superior to measurement of fetal blood pH in the prediction of both good and bad fetal outcomes. Under certain circumstances, fetal scalp blood sampling remains a valuable clinical tool; however, we recommend a deemphasis of fetal scalp blood sampling in general clinical practice. Both theoretical and practical considerations suggest that the properly trained clinician may pursue an approach for the detection of fetal distress that does not include scalp blood sampling without either compromising his ability to detect fetal distress or significantly increasing the cesarean section rate.
传统上,连续电子胎心监护和胎儿头皮血采样在产时胎儿监测中发挥着互补作用。然而,使用头皮血或脐血对胎儿血液pH值进行生化评估,常被视为评判胎儿窘迫生物物理指标的“金标准”。但在实际临床实践中,胎儿头皮血采样很少被使用。此外,越来越多的证据表明,若解读得当,在预测胎儿良好和不良结局方面,胎心评估可能等同于或优于胎儿血液pH值测量。在某些情况下,胎儿头皮血采样仍是一种有价值的临床工具;然而,我们建议在一般临床实践中减少对胎儿头皮血采样的重视。理论和实际考量均表明,经过适当培训的临床医生可采用一种不包括头皮血采样的胎儿窘迫检测方法,而不会损害其检测胎儿窘迫的能力,也不会显著提高剖宫产率。