Potential use of electrohysterography in obstetrics: a review article

References

• Vlemminx MWC, Rabotti C, van der Hout-van der Jagt MB, et al. Clinical use of Electrohysterography during term labor: a systematic review on diagnostic value, advantages, and limitations. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2018;73:303–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Euliano TY, Nguyen MT, Darmanjian S, et al. Monitoring uterine activity during labor: clinician interpretation of electrohysterography versus intrauterine pressure catheter and tocodynamometry. Amer J Perinatol. 2016;33:831–838.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberola-Rubio J, Prats-Boluda G, Ye-Lin Y, et al. Comparison of non-invasive electrohysterographic recording techniques for monitoring uterine dynamics. Med Eng Phys. 2013;35:1736–1743.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steer CM, Hertsch GJ. Electrical activity of the human uterus in labor; the electrohysterograph. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1950;59:25–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maul H, Maner WL, Saade GR, et al. The physiology of uterine contractions. Clin Perinatol. 2003;30:665–676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlembach D, Maner WL, Garfield RE, et al. Monitoring the progress of pregnancy and labor using electromyography. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;144:S33–S39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabotti C, Mischi M. Propagation of electrical activity in uterine muscle during pregnancy: a review. Acta Physiol. 2015;213:406–416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young RC. The uterine pacemaker of labor. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;52:68–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csapo A. The diagnostic significance of the intrauterine pressure. II. Clinical considerations and trials. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1970;25:515–543.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wolfs G, van Leeuwen M, Rottinghuis H, et al. An electromyographic study of the human uterus during labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1971;37:241–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young RC. Mechanotransduction mechanisms for coordinating uterine contractions in human labor. Reproduction. 2016;152:R51–R61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfs GM, van Leeuwen M. Electromyographic observations on the human uterus during labour. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1979;90:1–61.
   Google Scholar
• Ciontea SM, Radu E, Regalia T, et al. C-kit immunopositive interstitial cells (Cajal-type) in human myometrium. J Cellular Mol Med. 2005;9:407–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duquette RA, Shmygol A, Vaillant C, et al. Vimentin-positive, c-kit-negative interstitial cells in human and rat uterus: a role in pacemaking? Biol Reprod. 2005;72:276–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Euliano TY, Nguyen MT, Darmanjian S, et al. Monitoring uterine activity during labor: a comparison of 3 methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208:66.e1–66.e6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haran G, Elbaz M, Fejgin MD, et al. A comparison of surface acquired uterine electromyography and intrauterine pressure catheter to assess uterine activity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:412.e1–412.e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye-Lin Y, Garcia-Casado J, Prats-Boluda G, et al. Automatic identification of motion artifacts in EHG recording for robust analysis of uterine contractions. Comput Math Methods Med. 2014;2014:1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlemminx MWC, Thijssen KMJ, Bajlekov GI, et al. Electrohysterography for uterine monitoring during term labour compared to external tocodynamometry and intra-uterine pressure catheter. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;215:197–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steer CM. Electrohysterography. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1959;75:809–812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devedeux D, Marque C, Mansour S, et al. Uterine electromyography: a critical review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169:1636–1653.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberola-Rubio J, Garcia-Casado J, Ye-Lin Y, et al. Recording of electrohysterogram laplacian potential. Conference Proceedings of IEEE Engineering Medicine and Biology Society. Annual international conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Conference Proceedings. Boston, Massachusetts, United States. 2011. p. 2510–2513.
   Google Scholar
• Diab A, Hassan M, Marque C, et al. Performance analysis of four nonlinearity analysis methods using a model with variable complexity and application to uterine EMG signals. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36:761–767.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borowska M, Brzozowska E, Kuć P, et al. Identification of preterm birth based on RQA analysis of electrohysterograms. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2018;153:227–236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemancewicz A, Borowska M, Kuć P, et al. Early diagnosis of threatened premature labor by electrohysterographic recordings – the use of digital signal processing. Biocybern Biomed Eng. 2016;36:302–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye Y, Song X, Liu L, et al. Effects of patient-controlled epidural analgesia on uterine electromyography during spontaneous onset of labor in term nulliparous women. Reprod Sci. 2015;22:1350–1357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benalcazar-Parra C, Ye-Lin Y, Garcia-Casado J, et al. Electrohysterographic characterization of the uterine myoelectrical response to labor induction drugs. Med Eng Phys. 2018;56:27–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thijssen KMJ, Vlemminx MWC, Westerhuis M, et al. Uterine monitoring techniques from patients’ and users’ perspectives. AJP Rep. 2018;e184–e191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlemminx MWC, Thijssen KMJ, Bajlekov GI, et al. Could electrohysterography be the solution for external uterine monitoring in obese women? J Perinatol. 2018;38:580–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muszynski C, Happillon T, Azudin K, et al. Automated electrohysterographic detection of uterine contractions for monitoring of pregnancy: feasibility and prospects. BMC Preg Childbirth. 2018;18:136.
   Google Scholar
• Lammers WJ. The electrical activities of the uterus during pregnancy. Reprod Sci. 2013;20:182–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garfield RE, Blennerhassett MG, Miller SM. Control of myometrial contractility: role and regulation of gap junctions. Oxf Rev Reprod Biol. 1988;10:436–490.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sanborn BM. Ion channels and the control of myometrial electrical activity. Semin Perinatol. 1995;19:31–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar