Sonoelastography for the comparative assessment of cervical maturation after different approaches to cervical preparation ahead of labor induction

References

• WHO recommendations for Induction of Labour. Department of Reproductive Health and Research World Health Organization. Geneva: WHO; 2014. 42 р.
   Google Scholar
• Ezebialu IU, Eke AC, Eleje GU, et al. Methods for assessing pre-induction cervical ripening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(6):CD010762.
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg AE. Cevical ripening. Medscape Womens Health 2018. [cited 2018 Oct 17]. Available from: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/263311-overview
   Google Scholar
• Wormer KC, Williford AE. Bishop score. StatPearls. 2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470368/
   Google Scholar
• Von Schöning D, Fischer T, von Tucher E, et al. Cervical sonoelastography for improving prediction of preterm birth compared with cervical length measurement and fetal fibronectin test. J Perinat Med. 2015;43(5):531–536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatfield AS, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Sonographic cervical assessment to predict the success of labor induction: a systematic review with metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(2):186–192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feltovich H. Cervical evaluation: from ancient medicine to precision medicine. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(1):51–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Londero AP, Schmitz R, Bertozzi S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of cervical elastography in predicting labor induction success: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Perinat Med. 2016;44(2):167–178.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fruscalzo A, Mazza E, Feltovich H, et al. Cervical elastography during pregnancy: a critical review of current approaches with a focus on controversies and limitations. J Med Ultrason (2001). 2016;43(4):493–504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Зыкин БИ, Постнова НА, Медведев МЕ. Ультразвуковая эластография. Медицинский алфавит. 2013;1–2(10):14–19. [Zykin B.I., Postnova N.A., Medvedev M.E. Ultrasonic elastography. Medical alphabet. 2013;1–2(10):14–19 (in Russian)].
   Google Scholar
• Papadacci C, Bunting EA, Konofagou EE. 3D Quasi-static ultrasound elastography with plane wave in vivo. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2017;36(2):357–365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Основные показатели деятельности акушерско-гинекологической службы в 2012 году. Справочные материалы/Под ред. Е.Н. Байбариной. М., 2013. 42 с. [The main indicators of the obstetric and gynecological services in 2012. References/Ed. E.N. Baybarina. M., 2013. 42 p. (in Russian)].
   Google Scholar
• Thomas J, Fairclough A, Kavanagh J, et al. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014(6):CD003101.
   Google Scholar
• Kulhan NG, Kulhan M. Labor induction in term nulliparous women with premature rupture of membranes: oxytocin versus dinoprostone. Arch Med Sci. 2019;15(4):896–901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aduloju OP, Ipinnimo OM, Aduloju T. Oral misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a randomized controlled trial of hourly titrated and 2 hourly static oral misoprostol solution. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;29:1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Solt I, Wolf MF, Ben-Haroush S, et al. Foley catheter versus cervical double balloon for labor induction: a prospective randomized study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;11:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Bertholdt C, Morel O, Dap M, et al. Labor induction in indicated moderate to late preterm birth. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;33(1):157–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ornat L, Alonso-Ventura V, Bueno-Notivol J, et al. Health Outcomes and Systematic Analyses (HOUSSAY) Research Group. Misoprostol combined with cervical single or double balloon catheters versus misoprostol alone for labor induction of singleton pregnancies: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;10:1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Swiatkowska-Freund M, Preis K. Cervical elastography during pregnancy: clinical perspectives. Int J Womens Health. 2017;9:245–254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weichert A, von Schöning D, Fischer T, et al. Cervical sonoelastography and cervical length measurement but not cervicovaginal interleukin-6 are predictors for preterm birth. Ultrasound Int Open. 2016;2(3):E83–E89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jozwiak M, Bloemenkamp KW, Kelly AJ, et al. Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;3:CD001233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhard J, Raddatz R, Langer R, et al. Pilot study mechanical versus pharmacological term induction: a cohort group analysis of maternal and neonatal outcome - hygroscopic cervical dilator versus prostaglandin E2. Clin Obstet Gynecol Reprod. 2016;2. Available at: https://www.oatext.com/
   Google Scholar
• Chodankar R, Sood A, Gupta JK. An overview of the past, current and future trends for cervical ripening in induction of labour. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;19(3):219–226.
   Google Scholar
• Hapangama D, Neilson JP. Mifepristone for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;3:CD002865.
   Google Scholar
• Baev OR, Babich DA, Prikhodko AM, et al. A comparison between labor induction with only Dilapan-S and a combination of mifepristone and Dilapan-S in nulliparous women: a prospective pilot study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;1:1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Eke AC, Okigbo C. Mechanical methods for induction of labour: RHL commentary (last revised: 1 August 2012). The WHO Reproductive Health Library. Geneva: World Health Organization. MedGyn Products Inc. Package Insert: Laminaria. Addison (IL); 2012. Available from: https://extranet.who.int/
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson J. A study of the motility of the intact uterus at term. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1941;73:359–366.
   Google Scholar