Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-11-2017 | Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Estimation of neonatal outcome artery pH value according to CTG interpretation of the last 60 min before delivery: a retrospective study. Can the outcome pH value be predicted?

Authors: S. Kundu, E. Kuehnle, C. Schippert, J. von Ehr, P. Hillemanns, Ismini Staboulidou

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 5/2017

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to analyze whether the umbilical artery pH value can be estimated throughout CTG assessment 60 min prior to delivery and if the estimated umbilical artery pH value correlates with the actual one. This includes analysis of correlation between CTG trace classification and actual umbilical artery pH value. Intra-and interobserver agreement and the impact of professional experience on visual analysis of fetal heart rate tracing were evaluated.

Methods

This was a retrospective study. 300 CTG records of the last 60 min before delivery were picked randomly from the computer database with the following inclusion criteria; singleton pregnancy >37 weeks, no fetal anomalies, vaginal delivery either spontaneous or instrumental-assisted. Five obstetricians and two midwives of different professional experience classified 300 CTG traces according to the FIGO criteria and estimated the postnatal umbilical artery pH.

Results

The results showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) in estimated and actual pH value, independent of professional experience. Analysis and correlation of CTG assessment and actual umbilical artery pH value showed significantly (p < 0.05) diverging results. Intra- and interobserver variability was high. Intraobserver variability was significantly higher for the resident (p = 0.001). No significant differences were detected regarding interobserver variability.

Conclusion

An estimation of the pH value and consequently of neonatal outcome on the basis of a present CTG seems to be difficult. Therefore, not only CTG training but also clinical experience and the collaboration and consultation within the whole team is important.

Pattison N, McCowan L (2000) Cardiotocography for antepartum fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD001068

Donker DK, van Geijn HP, Hasman A (1993) Interobserver variation in the assessment of fetal heart rate recordings. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 52:21–28CrossRefPubMed

Palomäki O, Luukkaala T, Luoto R, Tuimala R (2006) Intrapartum cardiotocography—the dilemma of interpretational variation. J Perinat Med 34:298–302CrossRefPubMed

Westerhuis ME, van Horen E, Kwee A, van der Tweel I, Visser GH, Moons KG (2009) Inter- and intra-observer agreement of intrapartum ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram in women monitored by STAN. BJOG 116:545–551CrossRefPubMed

Devane D, Lalor J (2005) Midwives’ visual interpretation of intrapartum cardiotocographs: intra- and inter-observer agreement. J Adv Nurs 52:133–141CrossRefPubMed

Epstein AJ, Twogood S, Lee RH, Opper N, Beavis A, Miller DA (2013) Interobserver reliability of fetal heart rate pattern interpretation using NICHD definitions. Am J Perinatol 30:463–468PubMed

Ayres-de-Campos D, Bernardes J, Costa-Pereira A, Pereira-Leite L (1999) Inconsistencies in classification by experts of cardiotocograms and subsequent clinical decision. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 106:1307–1310CrossRefPubMed

Rhöse S, Heinis AMF, Vandenbussche F, van Drongelen J, van Dillen J (2014) Inter- and intra-observer agreement of nonreassuring cardiotocography analysis and subsequent clinical management. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 93:596–602CrossRefPubMed

Blix E, Sviggum O, Karen SK, Oian P (2003) Inter-observer variation in assessment of 845 labour admission tests: comparison between midwives and obstetricians in the clinical setting and two experts. BJOG 110:1–5CrossRefPubMed

10.

Figueras F, Albela S, Bonino S, Palacio M, Barrau E, Hernandez S, Casellas C, Coll O, Cararach V (2005) Visual analysis of antepartum fetal heart rate tracings: inter- and intra-observer agreement and impact of knowledge of neonatal outcome. J Perinat Med 33:241–245PubMed

11.

Spencer JA, Badawi N, Burton P, Keogh J, Pemberton P, Stanley F (1997) The intrapartum CTG prior to neonatal encephalopathy at term: a case-control study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:25–28CrossRefPubMed

12.

Schiermeier S, van Leeuwen P, Butterwegge M et al (2005) Cardiotocography—an established diagnostic method with current perspectives. Gynakol Prax 29:431–441

13.

Ayres-de-Campos D, Spong CY, Chandraharan E (2015) FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: cardiotocography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 131:13–24CrossRefPubMed

14.

Seliger G, Stenzel A, Kowalski EM, Hoyer D, Nowack S, Seeger S, Schneider U (2016) Evaluation of standardized, computerized Dawes/Redman heart-rate analysis based on different recording methods and in relation to fetal beat-to-beat heart rate variability. J Perinat Med 44:785–792CrossRefPubMed

15.

Cheng YW, Snowden JM, Handler SJ, Tager IB, Hubbard AE, Caughey AB (2014) Litigation in obstetrics: does defensive medicine contribute to increases in cesarean delivery? J Matern Neonatal Med 27:1668–1675CrossRef

16.

Reif P, Schott S, Boyon C, Richter J, Kavsek G, Timoh KN, Haas J, Pateisky P, Griesbacher A, Lang U, Ayres-de-Campos D (2016) Does knowledge of fetal outcome influence the interpretation of intrapartum cardiotocography and subsequent clinical management? A multicenter European study. BJOG 123:2208–2217CrossRefPubMed

17.

Costa A, Santos C, Ayres-de-Campos D, Costa C, Bernardes J (2010) Access to computerized analysis of intrapartum cardiotocographs improves clinicians’ prediction of newborn umbilical artery blood pH. BJOG 117:1288–1293CrossRefPubMed

18.

Kuehnle E, Herms S, Kohls F, Kundu S, Hillemanns P, Staboulidou I (2016) Correlation of fetal scalp blood sampling pH with neonatal outcome umbilical artery pH value. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294:763–770CrossRefPubMed

19.

Spencer JA (1993) Clinical overview of cardiotocography. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 100(Suppl. 9):4–7CrossRefPubMed

20.

Nielsen PV, Stigsby B, Nickelsen C, Nim J (1987) Intra- and inter-observer variability in the assessment of intrapartum cardiotocograms. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 99:421–424CrossRef

21.

Spila J, Chudacek V, Janku P, Hruban L, Bursa M, Huptych M, Zach L, Lhotska L (2014) Analysis of obstetricians’ decision making on CTG recordings. J Biomed Inform 51:72–79CrossRef

22.

Hruban L, Spilka J, Chudacek V, Janku P, Huptych M, Bursa M, Hudec A, Kacerovsky M, Koucky M, Prochazka M, Korecko V, Seget’a J, Simetka O, Mechurova A, Lhotska L (2015) Agreement on intrapartum cardiotocogram recordings between expert obstetricians. J Eval Clin Pract 21:694–702CrossRefPubMed

23.

Ayres-de-Campos D, Bernardes J (1999) Early, variable and late decelerations: can consensus be reached in their identification? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 65:305–306CrossRefPubMed

24.

Keith RD, Beckley S, Garibaldi JM, Westgate JA, Ifeachor EC, Greene KR (1995) A multicentre comparative study of 17 experts and an intelligent computer system for managing labour using the cardiotocogram. BJOG 102:688–700CrossRef

25.

Murphy KW, Johnson P, Moorcraft J, Pattinson R, Russell V, Turnbull A (1990) Birth asphyxia and the intrapartum cardiotocograph. BJOG 97:470–479CrossRef

26.

Bernardes J, Costa-Pereira A, Ayres-de-Campos D, van Geijn HP, Pereira-Leite L (1997) Evaluation of interobserver agreement of cardiotocograms. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 57:33–37CrossRefPubMed

27.

Bernardes J, Costa-Pereira A, Ayres-de-Campos D, van Geijn HP, Pereira-Leite L (1996) A more objective fetal heart rate baseline estimation. BJOG 103:714–715CrossRef

28.

Taylor GM, Mires GJ, Abel EW et al (2000) The development and validation of an algorithm for real-time computerized fetal heart rate monitoring in labour. BJOG 107:1130–1137CrossRefPubMed

29.

Ayres-de-Campos D, Bernardes J (2010) FIGO Subcommittee: twenty-five years after the FIGO guidelines for the use of fetal monitoring: time for a simplified approach? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 110:16CrossRef

30.

Rei M, Tavares S, Pinto P, Machado AP, Monteiro S, Costa A, Costa-Santos C, Bernardes J, Ayres-de-Campos D (2016) Interobserver agreement in CTG interpretation using the 2015 FIGO guidelines for intrapartum fetal monitoring. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 205:27–31CrossRefPubMed

31.

Ayres-de-Campos D, Arteiro D, Costa-Santos C, Bernardes J (2011) Knowledge of adverse neonatal outcome alters clinicians’ interpretation of the intrapartum cardiotocograph. BJOG 118:978–984CrossRefPubMed

32.

Reif P, Schott S, Boyon C, Rihcter J, Kavsek G, Timoh KN, Haas J, Pateisky P, Griesbacher A, Lang U, Ayres-de-Campos D (2016) Does knowledge of fetal outcome influence the interpretation of intrapartum cardiotocography and subsequent clinical management? A multicentre European study. BJOG. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13882 PubMed

33.

Schiermeier S, Westhof G, Leven A, Hatzmann H, Reinhard J (2011) Intra- and interobserver variability of intrapartum cardiotocography: a multicenter study comparing the FIGO classification with computer analysis software. Gynecol Obstet Invest 72:169–173CrossRefPubMed

Title: Estimation of neonatal outcome artery pH value according to CTG interpretation of the last 60 min before delivery: a retrospective study. Can the outcome pH value be predicted?
Authors: S. Kundu
E. Kuehnle
C. Schippert
J. von Ehr
P. Hillemanns
Ismini Staboulidou
Publication date: 01-11-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 5/2017
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-017-4516-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Estimation of neonatal outcome artery pH value according to CTG interpretation of the last 60 min before delivery: a retrospective study. Can the outcome pH value be predicted?

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2017

Long-term reliability of fractioned CO2 laser as a treatment for vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) symptoms

Cup detachment during vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery and birth outcome

Autoimmune progesterone dermatitis

Kisspeptin expression features in the arcuate and anteroventral periventricular nuclei of hypothalamus of letrozole-induced polycystic ovarian syndrome in rats

Major underestimation and overestimation of visual blood loss during cesarean deliveries: can they be predicted?

The preoperative albumin level is an independent prognostic factor for optimally debulked epithelial ovarian cancer