Evaluation of the labour process with serial transperineal ultrasonography and prediction of the type of birth

Ayca Nazli Bulut 1  and Venhar Ceyhan 1
  • 1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kayseri City Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey
Ayca Nazli Bulut
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kayseri City Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey
  • Email
  • Search for other articles:
  • degruyter.comGoogle Scholar
and Venhar Ceyhan
  • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kayseri City Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey
  • Search for other articles:
  • degruyter.comGoogle Scholar

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study is to follow the birth process with transperineal ultrasonography (TPU) and predict the delivery method using angle of progression (AOP).

Methods

The study included 134 patients. The AOP was examined with TPU in the lithotomy position applied at 4-h intervals, not at a time of straining or contractions. The relationship was examined between AOP and those who continued with vaginal delivery, and those who underwent caesarean section delivery.

Results

A total of 122 (91%) patients had vaginal delivery and 12 (9%) patients had cesarean delivery. In patients giving vaginal delivery, progress in AOP was observed in every 4-h measurement, but not in patients with cesarean section. In the ROC analysis, if 70% sensitivity and 75% specificity with AOP degree >132.5°, the patient was expected to have vaginal delivery with a probability of 77.5% (95% CI 0.62–0.93; p=0.002).

Conclusions

Rather than repeating digital examinations, the labour process can be monitored with serial TPU and the type of delivery can be predicted. There is a need for further studies for the measurement of AOP with TPU to become a part of clinical practice in the monitoring of the whole labour process.

  • 1.

    Ravanos, K, Dagklis, T, Petousis, S, Margioula-Siarkou, C, Prapas, Y, Prapas, N. Factors implicated in the initiation of human parturition in term and preterm labor: a review. Gynecol Endocrinol 2015;838:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2015.1076783.

  • 2.

    Harrison, MS, Ali, S, Pasha, O, Saleem, S, Althabe, F, Berrueta, M, et al. A prospective population-based study of maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes in the setting of prolonged labor, obstructed labor and failure to progress in low- and middle income countries. Reprod Health 2015:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-4755-12-S2-S9.

  • 3.

    Angeby, K, Wilde-Larsson, B, Hildingsson, I, Sandin-Bojö, A. Prevalence of prolonged latent phase and labor outcomes: review of birth records in a Swedish population. J Midwifery Women Health 2018:33–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.12704.

  • 4.

    Zhu, BP, Grigorescu, V, Le, T, Lin, M, Copeland, G, Barone, M, Turabelidze, G. Labor dystocia and its association with interpregnancy interval. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;19:121–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2005.12.016.

  • 5.

    Nizard, J, Haberman, S, Paltieli, Y, Gonen, R, Ohel, G, Nicholson, D, Ville, Y. How reliable is the determination of cervical dilation? Comparison of vaginal examination with spatial position-tracking ruler. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:402.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.01.002.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Lavender, T, Cuthbert, A, Smyth, RM. Effect of partograph use on outcomes for women in spontaneous labour at term and their babies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;8:CD005461. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005461.pub5.

    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Bonet, M, Oladapo, OT, Souza, JP, Gülmezoglu, AM. Diagnostic accuracy of the partograph alert and action lines to predict adverse birth outcomes: a systematic review. BJOG 2019;126:1524. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15884.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Yeo, L, Romero, R. Sonographic evaluation in the second stage of labor to improve the assessment of labor progress and its outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;33:253–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.6336.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Tutschek, B, Braun, T, Chantraine, F, Henrich, W. A study of progress of labour using intrapartum translabial ultrasound, assessing head station, direction, and angle of descent. BJOG 2011;118:62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02775.x.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    ISUOG Practice Guideline. Intrapartum ultrasound. https://www.isuog.org/resource/intrapartum-ultrasound-practice-guideline.html [Accessed 10 July 2018].

  • 11.

    Kalache, KD, D€uckelmann, AM, Michaelis, SA, Lange, J, Cichon, G, Dudenhausen, JW. Transperineal ultrasound imaging in prolonged second stage of labor with occipitoanterior presenting fetuses: how well does the “angle of progression” predict the mode of delivery?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;33:326–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.6294.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    D€uckelmann, AM, Bamberg, C, Michaelis, SA, Lange, J, Nonnenmacher, A, Dudenhausen, JW, et al. Measurement of fetal head descent using the “angle of progression” on transperineal ultrasound imaging is reliable regardless of fetal head station or ultrasound expertise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;35:216–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.7521.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Barbera, AF, Pombar, X, Perugino, G, Lezotte, DC, Hobbins, JC. A new method to assess fetal head descent in labor with transperineal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;33:313–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.6329.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    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;32:199–204. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.5360.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Hassan, WA, Eggebø, T, Ferguson, M, Gillett, A, Studd, J, Pasupathy, D, et al. The sonopartogram: a novel method for recording progress of labor by ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;43:189–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.13212.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Molina, FS, Terra, R, Carrillo, MP, Puertas, A, Nicolaides, KH. What is the most reliable ultrasound parameter for assessment of fetal head descent?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;36:493–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.7709.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Levy, R, Zaks, S, Ben-Arie, A, Perlman, S, Hagay, Z, Vaisbuch, E. Can angle of progression in pregnant women before onset of labor predict mode of delivery?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012;40:332–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.11195.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Eggebø, TM, Hassan, WA, Salvesen, KÅ, Lindjorn, E, Lees, CC. Sonographic prediction of vaginal delivery in prolonged labor: a two-center study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;43:195–201. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.13210.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Neto, RHC, Viana Junior, AB, Moron, AF, Junior, EA, Carvalho, FHC, Feitosaa, HN. Assessment of the angle of progression and distance perineum-head in the prediction of type of delivery and duration of labor using intrapartum ultrasonography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019;8:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2019.1666818.

  • 20.

    Chor, CM, Poon, LCY, Leung, TY. Prediction of labor outcome using serial transperineal ultrasound in the first stage of labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019;32:31–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2017.1369946.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Bishop, EH. Pelvıc scorıng for electıve inductıon. Obstet Gynecol 1964;24:266.

    • PubMed
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Kamel, R, Negm, S, Montaguti, E, Dodaro, MG, Brunelli, E, Di Donna, G, Soliman, E, Sharaf, MF, ElHarty, AS, Youssef, A. Reliability of transperinea ultrasound for the assessment of the angle of progression in labor using parasagittal approach versus midsagittal approach. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019;78:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2019.1678143.

  • 23.

    Frıck, A, Kostıv, V, Vojtassakova, D, Akolekar, R, Nıcolaıdes, KH. Comparison of different methods of measuring angle of progression in the prediction of labor outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019:1–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.21913.

Purchase article
Get instant unlimited access to the article.
$42.00
Log in
Already have access? Please log in.


or
Log in with your institution

Journal + Issues

Search