Foetal scalp blood sampling and ST-analysis of the foetal ECG for intrapartum foetal monitoring: a restricted systematic review.

Hmi Demaegd, Egr Bauters, G H Page

Open access · greenAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

A Review on Magnetic Induction Spectroscopy Potential for Fetal Acidosis Examination.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
Review

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hmi DemaegdJan Yperman Ziekenhuis, Department Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Briekestraat 12, 8900 Ieper.

Egr BautersJan Yperman Ziekenhuis, Department Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Briekestraat 12, 8900 Ieper.

G H PageJan Yperman Ziekenhuis, Department Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Briekestraat 12, 8900 Ieper.

St. Anna Ziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo investigate if foetal scalp blood sampling (FBS) is useful in preventing foetal metabolic acidosis in labour when ST-analysis of the foetal ECG (STAN ® ) is already being used as a second line technique for intrapartum foetal monitoring with cardiotocography (CTG).

designRestricted systematic review.

methodsBased on a literature search in July 2019, a restricted systematic review was performed. Studies comparing CTG+STAN ® +FBS with CTG+STAN ® , CTG+FBS or CTG only were included. Observational studies allowing FBS in addition to STAN ® reporting the indications, results and neonatal outcomes were included as well.

resultsFive randomised controlled trials (RCT) and seven observational trials were analysed. Based on the analysis of data coming from one RCT, FBS identifies foetal acidosis in 9.9% when performed in specific situations. Similarly, in observational trials it was found that in up to 10% of cases where STAN ® registration was less reliable, FBS suggested foetal acidosis. However, there is no evidence that FBS in these cases was capable of preventing metabolic acidosis or its neurological consequences.

conclusionBased on the available literature, no recommendations in favour of combining FBS with STAN ® monitoring can be made.

Indexed as

foetal scalp blood samplingintrapartum monitoringlabourmetabolic acidosisSTAN ®ST-analysis

Identifiers

PMID32322830

PMCPMC7162663

OpenAlexW3028011800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.