SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
External cephalic version for breech presentation before term.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cephalic version by moxibustion for breech presentation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions during pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Predictors of a successful external cephalic version: a population-based cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Comparison of Tocolytic Agents for Successful External Cephalic Version: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Sixteen Randomized Controlled Trials.Balkan medical journal · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of External Cephalic Version in Full-Term Breech Presentations: Retrospective Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Asymmetric developmental bifurcations in polarized environments: a new class of human variants, which may include autism.Molecular psychiatry · 2025Review
- Strategies to reduce cesarean deliveries: surveying Polish midwives and midwifery students on external cephalic version practices.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Routine 36-week scan: diagnosis and outcome of abnormal fetal presentation.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025Article
- Smoke or smokeless moxibustion treatment for breech presentation: A three-arm pilot trial.Japan journal of nursing science : JJNS · 2021Article
- External cephalic version at 38 weeks' gestation at a specialized German single center.PloS one · 2021Article
- Current Approach for External Cephalic Version in Germany.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2020Article
- Article
- Reviving external cephalic version: a review of its efficacy, safety, and technical aspects.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2019Review
- Adherence to guidelines and suboptimal practice in term breech delivery with perinatal death- a population-based case-control study in Norway.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Article
- Applying the Newman-Peacock Prognostic System to a Portuguese Obstetrical Population - A Useful Tool?Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2018Observational
- Fetal heart rate abnormalities during and after external cephalic version: Which fetuses are at risk and how are they delivered?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExternal cephalic version (ECV) of the breech fetus at term (after 37 weeks) has been shown to be effective in reducing the number of breech presentations and caesarean sections, but the rates of success are relatively low. This review examines studies initiating ECV prior to term (before 37 weeks' gestation).
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of a policy of beginning ECV before term (before 37 weeks' gestation) for breech presentation on fetal presentation at birth, method of delivery, and the rate of preterm birth, perinatal morbidity, stillbirth or neonatal mortality. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 March 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ECV attempted before term (37 weeks' gestation) or commenced before term, compared with a control group of women (in breech presentation) in which either no ECV attempted or ECV was attempted at term. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-RCTs or studies using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked for accuracy. Studies were assessed for risk of bias and for important outcomes the overall quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsFive studies are included (2187 women). It was not possible for the intervention to be blinded, and it is not clear what impact lack of blinding would have on the outcomes reported. For other 'Risk of bias' domains studies were either at low or unclear risk of bias.One study reported on ECV that was undertaken and completed before 37 weeks' gestation compared with no ECV. No difference was found in the rate of non-cephalic presentation at birth (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.69; participants = 102). One study reported on a policy of ECV that was initiated before term (33 weeks) and up until 40 weeks' gestation and which could be repeated up until delivery compared with no ECV. This study showed a decrease in the rate of non-cephalic presentation at birth (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.77; participants = 179).Three studies reported on ECV started at between 34 to 35 weeks' gestation compared with beginning at 37 to 38 weeks' gestation. Pooled results suggested that early ECV reduced the risk of non-cephalic presentation at birth (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.90; participants = 1906; studies = three; I² = 0%, evidence graded high quality), failure to achieve vaginal cephalic birth (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 1888; studies = three; I² = 0%, evidence graded high quality), and vaginal breech delivery (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.78; participants = 1888; studies = three; I² = 0%, evidence graded high quality). The difference between groups for risk of caesarean was not statistically significant (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; participants = 1888; studies = three; I² = 0%, evidence graded high quality). There was evidence that risk of preterm labour was increased with early ECV compared with ECV after 37 weeks (6.6% in the ECV group and 4.3% for controls) (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.21; participants = 1888; studies = three; I² = 0%, evidence graded high quality). There was no clear difference between groups for low infant Apgar score at five minutes or perinatal death (stillbirth plus neonatal mortality up to seven days) (evidence graded as low quality for both outcomes). AUTHORS'
conclusionsCompared with no ECV attempt, ECV commenced before term reduces non-cephalic presentation at birth. Compared with ECV at term, beginning ECV at between 34 to 35 weeks may have some benefit in terms of decreasing the rate of non-cephalic presentation, and risk of vaginal breech birth. However, early ECV may increase risk of late preterm birth, and it is important that any future research reports infant morbidity outcomes. Results of the review suggest that there is a need for careful discussion with women about the timing of the ECV procedure so that they can make informed decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.