Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2023
Cardiotocography combined with ST analysis versus cardiotocography combined with fetal blood sampling in deliveries with abnormal CTG: a randomized trial.
Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01699646 (Cardiotocography Combined With ST-analysis Versus Cardiotocography Combined With Scalp-pH in Deliveries With Abnormal CTG - A Randomised Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Cardiotocography Combined With ST-analysis Versus Cardiotocography Combined With Scalp-pH in Deliveries With Abnormal CTG - A Randomised Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- ST waveform analysis vs cardiotocography alone for intrapartum fetal monitoring: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Pooled it
- Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Comparison of effect of CTG + STan with CTG alone on emergency Cesarean section rate: STan Australian Randomized controlled Trial (START).Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2023Trial
- Validation and proposal of a clinical intervention cutoff in fetal scalp blood for the point-of care-lactate meter StatStripActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim was to investigate if intrapartum monitoring with cardiotocography (CTG) in combination with ST analysis (STAN) results in an improved perinatal outcome.
methodsWe performed a two-center randomized trial. 1013 women with term fetuses in cephalic presentation entered the trial. If a CTG showed intermediate or pathological abnormalities, they were offered fetal blood sampling (FBS) and inclusion if the pH value was above 7.25. They were randomized to either CTG + FBS or CTG + STAN. The primary outcome was neonatal metabolic acidosis, defined as umbilical cord arterial blood pH below 7.05, and base excess equal to or below -10. The secondary outcomes included operative vaginal delivery for fetal distress.
resultsThe rate of metabolic acidosis was 0.8% in the CTG + FBS group and 1.5% in women in the CTG + STAN (P = 0.338). More women in the CTG + STAN group delivered by operative vaginal delivery (25.6% vs 33.5%, P = 0.006). Significantly fewer women in the CTG + STAN group had three to five (28.8% vs 11.0%, P = < 0.001) and six to ten fetal blood samples taken (3.4% vs 0.4%, P = < 0.001).
conclusionCTG + STAN did not reduce the incidence of neonatal metabolic acidosis compared to CTG + FBS. CTG + STAN was, however, associated with an increased risk of operative vaginal delivery and a reduced use of FBS. If STAN is used for fetal surveillance, we recommend that it is combined with other methods, such as FBS, for confirmation of the need for operative delivery. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ID: NCT01699646. Date of registration: October 4, 2012 (retrospectively registered). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01699646?id=NCT01699646&draw=2&rank=1.
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.