ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2022
How should we interpret lactate in labour? A reference study.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Saliva and plasma metabolome analysis during the five days before foaling in the mare.PloS one · 2026Article
- Osteocalcin in human breast milk over the course of lactation.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Observational
- How should we interpret lactate in labour? A reference study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate maternal lactate concentrations in labour and the puerperium.
designReference study.
settingTertiary obstetric unit. POPULATION: 1279 pregnant women with good perinatal outcomes at term.
methodsElectronic patient records were searched for women who had lactate measured on the day of delivery or in the following 24 hours, but who were subsequently found to have a very low likelihood of sepsis, based on their outcomes.
main outcome measuresThe normative distribution of lactate and C-reactive protein (CRP), differences according to the mode of birth, and the proportion of results above the commonly used cut-offs (≥2 and ≥4 mmol/l).
resultsLactate varied between 0.4-5.4 mmol/l (median 1.8 mmol/l, interquartile range [IQR] 1.3-2.5). It was higher in women who had vaginal deliveries than caesarean sections (median 1.9 vs. 1.6 mmol/l, p
conclusionsLactate in labour and the puerperium is commonly elevated above the levels expected in healthy pregnant or non-pregnant women. There is a paucity of evidence to support using lactate or CRP to make decisions about antibiotics around the time of delivery but, as lactate is rarely higher than 4 mmol/l, this upper limit may still represent a useful severity marker for the investigation and management of sepsis in labour.
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.