What Happens after a Failed External Cephalic Version? [36I]. (May 2018)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- What Happens after a Failed External Cephalic Version? [36I]. (May 2018)
- Main Title:
- What Happens after a Failed External Cephalic Version? [36I]
- Authors:
- Katukuri, Vivek R.
Andrews, Suzanne
Leeman, Lawrence
Yonke, Nicole - Abstract:
- Abstract : INTRODUCTION: To compare perinatal outcomes following a failed external cephalic version (ECV) to a successful ECV and a planned cesarean delivery METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study from January 2012 to June 2015. We included singleton, nonanamolous live births delivered after 36 weeks. We performed a comparison of perinatal outcomes between women who had an unsuccessful ECV, a successful ECV and a planned cesarean delivery. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal outcomes, which included APGAR <7 at 5 minutes, NICU or intermediate care nursery admission, need for respiratory support and hypoglycemia. A secondary outcome was final mode of delivery among women attempting ECV. RESULTS: We identified 236 pregnancies meeting inclusion criteria, 126 (53.3%) of which attempted ECV with 110 (46.7%) undergoing planned cesarean delivery. The success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) was 50.7% (n=64). Among women who had successful ECV, the rate of cesarean section was 25% (n=16). Among women with failed ECV, the rate of the primary outcome was 6.8% (n=4), versus 12.9% (n=7) in the successful group and 10.9% (n=12) in the planned cesarean group (p=0.59). There was no difference in the rates of Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, NICU or intermediate care nursery admission, need for respiratory support or hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: ECV was not associated with an absolute risk increase in the primary composite outcome compared to planned cesarean for fetalAbstract : INTRODUCTION: To compare perinatal outcomes following a failed external cephalic version (ECV) to a successful ECV and a planned cesarean delivery METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study from January 2012 to June 2015. We included singleton, nonanamolous live births delivered after 36 weeks. We performed a comparison of perinatal outcomes between women who had an unsuccessful ECV, a successful ECV and a planned cesarean delivery. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal outcomes, which included APGAR <7 at 5 minutes, NICU or intermediate care nursery admission, need for respiratory support and hypoglycemia. A secondary outcome was final mode of delivery among women attempting ECV. RESULTS: We identified 236 pregnancies meeting inclusion criteria, 126 (53.3%) of which attempted ECV with 110 (46.7%) undergoing planned cesarean delivery. The success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) was 50.7% (n=64). Among women who had successful ECV, the rate of cesarean section was 25% (n=16). Among women with failed ECV, the rate of the primary outcome was 6.8% (n=4), versus 12.9% (n=7) in the successful group and 10.9% (n=12) in the planned cesarean group (p=0.59). There was no difference in the rates of Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, NICU or intermediate care nursery admission, need for respiratory support or hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: ECV was not associated with an absolute risk increase in the primary composite outcome compared to planned cesarean for fetal malpresentation. This evidence provides support for ECV as a safe alternative for women with fetal malpresentation who desire a vaginal delivery regardless of outcome. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Obstetrics and gynecology. Volume 131(2018)Supplement 1
- Journal:
- Obstetrics and gynecology
- Issue:
- Volume 131(2018)Supplement 1
- Issue Display:
- Volume 131, Issue 1 (2018)
- Year:
- 2018
- Volume:
- 131
- Issue:
- 1
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2018-0131-0001-0000
- Page Start:
- Page End:
- Publication Date:
- 2018-05
- Subjects:
- Obstetrics -- Periodicals
Gynecology -- Periodicals
618 - Journal URLs:
- http://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/pages/default.aspx ↗
http://journals.lww.com ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1097/01.AOG.0000533462.17181.3f ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0029-7844
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 6208.200000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 6893.xml