Impact of parity on obstetric and neonatal outcome of external cephalic version

References

• Ben-Arie A, Kogan S, Schachter M, Hagay Z J, Insler V. The impact of external cephalic version on the rate of vaginal and caesarean breech deliveries: a 3-year cumulative experience. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Reproductive Biology 1995; 63: 125–129
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ben-Haroush A, Perri T, Bar J, Yogev Y, Bar-Hava I, Hod M, et al. Mode of delivery following successful external cephalic version. American Journal of Perinatology 2002; 19: 355–360
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bewley S, Robson S, Smith M, Glover A, Spencer J. The introduction of external cephalic version into routine clinical practice. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Reproductive Biology 1993; 52: 89–93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brenner W, Bruce R, Hendricks C. The characteristics and perils of breech presentation. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1974; 118: 700–712
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bujold E, Sergerie M, Masse A, Verscelden G, Bedard M J, Dube J. Sublingual nitroglycerine as a tocolytic in external cephalic version: a comparative study. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Canada 2003; 25: 203–207
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Burr R, Helyer P, Robson S. A training model for external cephalic version. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Reproductive Biology 2001; 99: 199–200
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ezra Y, Elram T, Plotkin V, Elchalal U. Significance of success rate of external cephalic versions and breech deliveries in counselling women with breech presentations at term. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Reproductive Biology 2000; 90: 63–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fok W Y, Chan L W, Leung T Y, Lau T K. Maternal experience of pain during external cephalic version at term. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2005; 84: 748–751
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Foote A J. External cephalic version from 34 weeks under tocolysis: factors influencing success. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1995; 21: 127–132
   Google Scholar
• Gifford D, Keeler E, Kahn K. Reductions in cost and caesarean rate by routine use of external cephalic version: a decision analysis. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995; 85: 930–936
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guyer H M, Heard J C. A prospective audit of external cephalic version at term: are ultrasound parameters predictive of outcome. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2001; 21: 580–582
   Google Scholar
• Hughes G. Establishing an external cephalic version clinic: outcome of the first year. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1997; 17: 127–131
   Google Scholar
• Hannah M, Hannah W, Hewson S, Hodnett E, Saigal S, Willan A. Planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2000; 356: 1375–1383
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickok D E, Gordon D C, Milberg J A, Williams M A, Daling J R. The frequency of breech presentation by gestational age at birth: a large population based study. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 1992; 166: 851–852
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmeyr G. External cephalic version at term: how high are the stakes?. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1991; 98: 1–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hofmeyr G, Myer I, Galal K, Simko G. External cephalic version and spontaneous version rates: ethnic and other determinants. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1986; 93: 13–16
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hutton E K, Hannah M E, Barrett J. Use of external cephalic version for breech pregnancy and mode of delivery for breech and twin pregnancy: a survey of Canadian practitioners. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Canada 2002; 24: 804–810
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Karantanis E, Alcock D, Phelan L, Homer C, Davis G. Introducing external cephalic version to clinical practice. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2001; 41: 395–397
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kauppila O. The perinatal mortality in breech delivery and observation on affecting factors. A retrospective study of 2227 cases. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1975; 39: 1–79
   Google Scholar
• Impey L, Lissoni D. Outcome of external cephalic version after 36 weeks' gestation without tocolysis. Journal of Maternal Fetal Medicine 1999; 8: 203–207
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Laros R, Flanagan T, Kilpatrick S. Management of term breech presentation: a protocol of external cephalic version and selective trial of labor. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995; 172: 1916–1925
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau T, Lo K, Rogers M. Pregnancy outcome after successful external cephalic version for breech presentation at term. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1997; 176: 218–223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macarthur A, Gagnon S, Tureanu L, Downey K. Anesthesia facilitation of external cephalic version: a meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004; 191: 1219–1224
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mukhopadhyay S, Arulkumaran S. Breech delivery. Best Practice and Research in Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2002; 16: 31–42
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nielsen T, Hokegard K. Postoperative caesarean section morbidity: a prospective study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1983; 146: 911–915
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nor Azlin M, Haliza H, Mahdy Z, Anson I, Fahya M, Jamil M. Tocolysis in term breech external cephalic version. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2005; 88: 5–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norchi S, Tenore A, Lovotti M, Merati R, Teatini A, Belloni C. Efficacy of external cephalic version performed at term. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Reproductive Biology 1998; 76: 161–163
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regalia A L, Curiel P, Natale N, Galluzzi A, Spinelli G, Ghezzi G VL, et al. Routine use of external cephalic version in three hospitals. Birth 2000; 27: 19–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson A, Kopelman J, Read J, Duff P, Mageissen D, Dashow E. External cephalic version at term: is tocolysis necessary?. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1987; 70: 896–899
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RCOG. RCOG Clinical Guidelines. The management of breech presentation. RCOG Press, London 2001
   Google Scholar
• Sachs B. Cesarean section related maternal mortality in Massachusetts: 1954 – 1985. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1988; 71: 385–388
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seeds J, Cefalo R. Malpresentations. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 1982; 25: 145–156
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams J, Bjornsson S, Cameron A, Mathers A, Yahya S Z, Pell J. Prospective study of external cephalic version in Glasgow: patient selection, outcome and factors associated with outcome. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999; 19: 598–601
   Google Scholar
• Wong W M, Lao T T, Liu K L. Predicting the success of external cephalic version with a score system. A prospective two phase study. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2000; 45: 201–206
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Bowes W, Fortney J. Efficacy of external cephalic version: a review. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1993; 82: 306–312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar