Re-engineering the interpretation of electronic fetal monitoring to identify reversible risk for cerebral palsy: a case control series

References

• ACOG. Neonatal encephalopathy and neurologic outcome. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• ACOG. Neonatal encephalopathy and cerebral palsy: defining the pathogenesis and Pathophysiology. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Soncini E, Paganelli S, Vezzani C, et al. Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: evaluation of a standardized system of interpretation for prediction of metabolic acidosis at delivery and neonatal neurological morbidity. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:1465–1469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alfirevic Z, Devane D, Gyte GM. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(5):CD006066. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006066.pub2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palomäki O, Luukkaala T, Luoto R, et al. Intrapartum cardiotocography – the dilemma of interpretational variation. J Perinat Med. 2006;34:298–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmelmann K, Sundh V. Survival with cerebral palsy over five decades in western Sweden. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2015;57:762–767.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brocklehurst P, Field DJ, Juszczak E, et al. The INFANT trial. Lancet. 2017;390:28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimes DA, Peipert JF. Electronic fetal monitoring as a public health screening program: the arithmetic of failure. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1397–1400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sartwelle TP, Johnston JC. Cerebral palsy litigation: change course or abandon ship. J Child Neurol. 2015;30:828–841.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apfel D. Using a differential diagnosis to prove that intrapartum asphyxia is a significant cause of CEREBRAL palsy. Am J Trial Advocacy. 2006;30:89–163.
   Google Scholar
• MacLennan A, Nelson KB, Hankins G, et al. Who will deliver our grandchildren? Implications of cerebral palsy litigation. JAMA. 2005;294:1688–1690.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Knijf A, Pattinson RC. Confidential enquiries into quality of care of women in labour using Hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy as a marker. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2010;2:219–225.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vintzileos AM. Measuring the impact of attending physician teaching in an obstetrics and gynecology residency program. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:617–618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iriye BK, Gregory KD, Saade GR, et al. Quality measures in high-risk pregnancies: executive Summary of a Cooperative Workshop of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:B2–BB25.
   Google Scholar
• Benacerraf BR, Minton KK, Benson CB, et al. Proceedings: beyond ultrasound first Forum on improving the quality of ultrasound imaging in obstetrics and gynecology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:19–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopkins L, Hampton BS, Abbott JF, et al. To the point: medical education, technology, and the millennial learner. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:188–192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moaddab A, Clark SL, Dildy GA, et al. The July phenomenon in current obstetric practice. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:487–488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke N, Burke G, Breathnach F, et al. Prediction of cesarean delivery in the term nulliparous woman: results from the prospective, multicenter Genesis study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:598.e1–598.e11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macones GA, Hankins GD, Spong CY, et al. The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2008;37:510–515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sholapurkar SL. Imperative for improvements and international convergence of intrapartum fetal monitoring: a bird’s eye view. WJOG. 2016;5:102–109.
   Google Scholar
• Clark SL, Hamilton EF, Garite TJ, et al. The limits of electronic fetal heart rate monitoring in the prevention of neonatal metabolic acidemia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:163.e1–163.e6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parer JT, King T, Flanders S, et al. Fetal acidemia and electronic fetal heart rate patterns: is there evidence of an association? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2006;19:289–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Visser GH, Kwee A. Cardiotocography alone is outdated and ST analysis is the way forward in fetal monitoring: FOR: does the use of ST analysis in conjunction with cardiotocography improve perinatal outcome and/or reduce interventions for fetal distress? BJOG. 2016;123:1636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stener Jørgensen J. Fetal scalp blood sampling should be abandoned: against: fetal scalp blood sampling in conjunction with electronic fetal monitoring reduces the risk of unnecessary operative delivery. BJOG. 2016;123:1771.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thavarajah H, Flatley C, Kumar S. The relationship between the five minute Apgar score, mode of birth and neonatal outcomes. J Matern Fet Neonat Med. 2018;31:1335–1341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schifrin BS, Koos B. Defining the limits of electronic fetal heart rate. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schifrin BS, Deymier P, Cohen WR. Cranial compression ischemic encephalopathy: fetal neurological injury related to the mechanical forces of labor and delivery. In: Stress and Developmental Programming of Health and Disease: Beyond Phenomenology. New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Jonsson M, Ågren J, Nordén-Lindeberg S, et al. Neonatal encephalopathy and the association to asphyxia in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:667.e1–667.e8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham EM, Adami RR, McKenney SL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fetal heart rate monitoring in the identification of neonatal encephalopathy. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124:507–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cahill A, Macones G, McKinstry RC, et al. EFM and peripartum factors associated with brain injury in term infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212:S5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans MI, Wapner RJ, Berkowitz RL. Noninvasive prenatal screening or advanced diagnostic testing: caveat emptor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:298–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eden RD, Evans MI, Evans SM, et al. The “fetal reserve index”: re-engineering the interpretation and responses to fetal heart rate patterns. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2018;43:90–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rochard F, Schifrin BS, Goupil F, et al. Nonstressed fetal heart rate monitoring in the antepartum period. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1976;126:699–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devoe LD. Clinical implications of prospective antepartum fetal heart rate testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;137:983–990.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korst LM, Phelan JP, Wang YM, et al. Acute fetal asphyxia and permanent brain injury: a retrospective analysis of current indicators. J Matern Fetal Med. 1999;8:101–106.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evans LC, Liu H, Thompson LP. Differential effect of intrauterine hypoxia on caspase 3 and DNA fragmentation in fetal guinea pig hearts and brains Reprod Sci. 2012;19:298–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson KR, James DC. Effects of oxytocin-induced uterine hyperstimulation during labor on fetal oxygen status and fetal heart rate patterns. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:34.e1–34.e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schifrin BS, Ater S. Fetal hypoxic and ischemic injuries. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;18:112–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith S, Zacharias J, Lucas V, et al. Clinical associations with uterine tachysystole. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:709–713.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey HA, Tuuli MG, Roehl KA, et al. Can contraction patterns predict neonatal outcomes? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:1422–1427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sholapurkar SL. Critical imperative for the reform of British interpretation of fetal heart rate decelerations: analysis of FIGO and NICE guidelines, post-truth foundations, cognitive fallacies, myths and Occam’s razor. J Clin Med Res. 2017;9:253–265.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nelson KB, Dambrosia JM, Ting TY, et al. Uncertain value of electronic fetal monitoring in predicting cerebral palsy. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:613–618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst A. Prevention of perinatal asphyxia. Can more be done by fetal monitoring? Lakartidningen. 2000;97:3484–3488.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jensen A, Holmer B. White matter damage in 4,725 term-born infants is determined by head circumference at birth – the missing link. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2018. (in press).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grobman WA, Bailit J, Lai Y, et al. Association of the duration of active pushing with obstetric outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:667–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bleich AT, Alexander JM, McIntire DD, et al. An analysis of second-stage labor beyond 3 hours in nulliparous women. Am J Perinatol. 2012;29:717–722.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steer PJ, Carter MC, Beard RW. The effect of oxytocin infusion on uterine activity levels in slow labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985;92:1120–1126.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cohen WR. Influence of the duration of second stage labor on perinatal outcome and puerperal morbidity. Obstet Gynecol. 1977;49:266–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark SL, Nageotte MP, Garite TJ, et al. Intrapartum management of category II fetal heart rate tracings: towards standardization of care. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:89–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayres-de-Campos D, Spong CY, Chandraharan E, et al. for the FIGO Intrapartum Fetal Monitoring Expert Consensu Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: cardiotocography. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2015;131:13–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar