Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Pre-induction translabial ultrasound measurements in predicting mode of delivery compared to bishop score: a cross-sectional study

Authors: Soghra Khazardoost, Fahimeh Ghotbizadeh Vahdani, Sahar Latifi, Sedighe Borna, Maryam Tahani, Mohammad Ali Rezaei, Masoomeh Shafaat

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

By increased concerns about the accuracy of the traditional methods to predict outcomes after induction of labor, developing new standards has a great clinical importance. Here, we compared the predictive value of translabial ultrasound measurements with Bishop Score to determine the suitability of induction of labor.

Methods

A homogenous population of primigravid women was recruited. Induction of labor was performed with low-dose infusion of oxytocin. Translabial ultrasound and assessment of Bishop Score were performed by two different obstetricians. Receiver–operating characteristics curves were obtained to measure area under curve and subsequently, test sensitivity of each method.

Results

One hundred women entered the investigation. Maternal body mass index was significantly higher among candidates of Cesarean section (P: 0.02). Maternal age and fetus weight, gender and occiput position were not determinants of outcomes of induction of labor. Cervical length and fetal head-pubis symphysis distance measured by translabial ultrasound had a test sensitivity of 90 and 88 %, respectively which were slightly higher than sensitivity of Bishop score (84 %).

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that translabial measurements can be a suitable alternative method to monitor labor progress with an admissible predictive value compared with Bishop Score. It is a non-invasive method which provides valuable objective measurements and can be better accepted by women when considering the painful process which is required in evaluating Bishop Score.
Literature
1.
Maslow AS, Sweeny AL. Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(6 Pt 1):917–22.PubMed
2.
Heffner LJ, Elkin E, Fretts RC. Impact of labor induction, gestational age, and maternal age on cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(2):287–93.PubMed
3.
Eggebø TM, Heien C, Økland I, Gjessing LK, Romundstad P, Salvesen KA. Ultrasound assessment of fetal head-perineum distance before induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32(2):199–204.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Crowley P. Interventions for preventing or improving the outcome of delivery at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;2:CD000170.
5.
Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24:266–8.PubMed
6.
Jackson GM, Ludmir J, Bader TJ. The accuracy of digital examination and ultrasound in the evaluation of cervical length. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79(2):214–8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Holcomb Jr WL, Smeltzer JS. Cervical effacement: Variation and belief among clinicians. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;78(1):43–5.PubMed
8.
Buchmann E. libhaber E. Interobserver agreement in intra partum estimation of fetal head station. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2008;101(3):285–9.CrossRef
9.
Dupuis O, Silveira R, Zentner A, Dittmar A, Gaucherand P, Cucherat M, et al. Birth simulator: reliability of transvaginal assessment of fetal head station as defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists classification. Am J ObstetGynecol. 2005;192(3):868–74.CrossRef
10.
Sadoul G, Beuret T, Lewin D. The different elements constituting the Bishop score in the induction of labor with epidural analgesia. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 1981;10(3):269–73.
11.
Faltin-Traub EF, Boulvain M, Faltin DL, Extermann P, Irion O. Reliability of the Bishop score before labor induction at term. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004;112(2):178–81.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Newman RB, Goldenberg RL, Iams JD, Meis PJ, Mercer BM, Moawad AH, et al. Preterm prediction study: comparison of the cervical score and Bishop score for prediction of spontaneous preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(3):508–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. Models for the prediction of successful induction of labor based on pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005;17(5):315–22.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Rane SM, Pandis GK, Guirgis RR, Nicolaides KH. Pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length in prolonged pregnancy: the effect of parity in the prediction of the need for Cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;22(1):40–4.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. The value of ultrasound in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;24(5):538–49.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Laencina AM, Sanchez FG, Gimenez JH, Martinez MS, Martinez JA, Vizcaino VM. Comparison of ultrasonographic cervical length and the Bishop score in predicting successful labor induction. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(7):799–804.CrossRef
17.
Rozenberg P, Chevret S, Chastang C, Ville Y. Comparison of digital and ultrasonographic examination of the cervix in predicting time interval from induction to delivery in women with a low Bishop score. BJOG. 2005;112(2):192–6.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Rozenberg P, Chevret S, Ville Y. Comparison of pre-induction ultrasonographic cervical length and Bishop score in predicting risk of cesarean section after labor induction with prostaglandins. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2005;33(1–2):17–22.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Tutschek B, Braun T, Chantraine F, Henrich W. A study of progress of labor using intrapartumtranslabial ultrasound, assessing head station, direction, and angle of descent. BJOG. 2011;118(1):62–9.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom S, Spong CY, Dashe J. Williams Obstetrics. 24th ed. 2014. p. 456.
22.
ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins – Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(2 Pt 1):386–97.
23.
Ho D, Lanzarone V. Measuring engagement of fetal head: validity and reproducibility of a new ultrasound technique. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25(2):165–8.CrossRef
24.
Eggebø TM, Gjessing LK, Heien C, Smedvig E, Økland I, Romundstad P, et al. Prediction of labor and delivery by trans perineal ultrasound in pregnancies with prelabor rupture of membranes at term. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;27(4):387–91.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Valentin L, Bergelin I. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of ultrasound measurements of cervical length and width in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;20(3):256–62.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Tenore J. Methods for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Am Fam Physician. 2003;67(10):2123–8.PubMed
27.
28.
Sherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, Langer O. Intrapartum fetal head position II: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and trans abdominal ultrasound assessment during the second stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(3):264–8.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Sherer DM, Miodovnik M, Bradley KS, Langer O. Intrapartum fetal head position I: comparison between trans vaginal digital examination and trans abdominal ultrasound assessment during the active stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(3):258–63.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Kreiser D, Schiff E, Lipitz S, Kayam Z, Avraham A, Achiron R. Determination of fetal occiput position by ultrasound during the second stage of labor. J Maternal fetal Med. 2001;10(4):283–6.CrossRef
31.
Akmal S, Tsoi E, Kametas N, Howard R, Nicolaides KH. Intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head position. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12(3):172–7.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Akmal S, Kametas N, Tsoi E, Hargreaves C, Nicolaides KH. Comparison of transvaginal digital examination with intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head position before instrumental delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21(5):437–40.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Souka AP, Haritos T, Basayiannis K, Noikokyri N, Antsaklis A. Intrapartum ultrasound for the examination of the fetal head position in normal and obstructed labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;13(1):59–63.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Gabriel R, Darnaud T, Chalot F, Gonzalez N, Leymarie F, Quereux C. Transvaginal sonography of the uterine cervix prior to labor induction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(3):254–7.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Ware V, Raynor BD. Transvaginal ultrasonograpic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(5):1030–2.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Uyar Y, Erbay G, Demir BC, Baytur Y. Comparison of the Bishop Score body mass index and Transvaginal cervical length. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009;280(3):357–62.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Tan P, Cvallikkunnu N, Sugunas, Quek KF, Hassan J. Transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length vs. Bishop score in labor induction at term: tolerability and prediction of Cesarean delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;29(5):568–73.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Bartha JL, Romero-Carmona R, Martinez-Del-Fresno P, Comino-Delgado R. Bishop score and transvaginal ultrasound for preinduction cervical assessment: a randomized clinical trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25(2):155–9.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Pandis GK, Papageorghiou AT, Ramanathan VG, Thompson MO, Nicolaides KH. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18(6):623–8.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Gonen R, Degani S, Ron A. Prediction of successful induction of labor: comparison of transvaginal ultrasonography and the Bishop score. Eur J Ultrasound. 1998;7(3):183–7.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Mikulandra F, Persia M, Stojnic E. When is fetal macrosomia (> or = 4500 g) an indication for caesarean section? Zentralbl Gynakol. 1996;118(8):441–7.PubMed
42.
Peregrine E, O’Brien P, Omar R, Jauniaux E. Clinical and ultrasound parameters to predict the risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(2 Pt 1):227–33.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Dietz HP, Lanzarone V, Simpson JM. Predicting operative delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;27(4):409–15.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Nader R, Shek KL, Dietz HP. Predicting the outcome of induction of labor. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;50(4):329–33.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Niino Y. The increasing cesarean rate globally and what we can do about it. Biosci Trends. 2011;5(4):139–50.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Arrieta A. Health reform and cesarean sections in the private sector: The experience of Peru. Health Policy. 2010;99(2):124–30.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ. Births: Preliminary Data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2010;59(3):1–14.
48.
Stafford RS. Cesarean section use and source of payment: An analysis of California hospital discharge abstracts. Am J Public Health. 1990;80(3):313–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Pre-induction translabial ultrasound measurements in predicting mode of delivery compared to bishop score: a cross-sectional study
Authors
Soghra Khazardoost
Fahimeh Ghotbizadeh Vahdani
Sahar Latifi
Sedighe Borna
Maryam Tahani
Mohammad Ali Rezaei
Masoomeh Shafaat
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1090-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

Determinants of stillbirths in Ghana: does quality of antenatal care matter?

Research article

The influence of physical activity during pregnancy on maternal, fetal or infant heart rate variability: a systematic review

Research article

Examining the impact of introducing ICD-MM on observed trends in maternal mortality rates in the UK 2003–13

Research article

Pregnancy related anxiety and general anxious or depressed mood and the choice for birth setting: a secondary data-analysis of the DELIVER study

Research article

Neonatal and maternal outcomes following midtrimester preterm premature rupture of the membranes: a retrospective cohort study

Study protocol

A descriptive longitudinal study protocol: recurrence and pregnancy post-repair of obstetric fistula in Guinea