ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Impact of SARS-CoV-2 on intrapartum cardiotocography: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 emerged, pregnant women were identified as a vulnerable group. Infection will induce a hypercoagulable state and a proinflammatory response, with a possible cytokine storm. This can be associated with thrombosis and infarction of the placenta. The fetus would have a reactive response to maternal inflammation and fever, reflected in the fetal heart rate changes on the cardiotocography (CTG). Some studies report an increased frequency of CTG abnormalities in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2. The objective of our study was to evaluate frequency of abnormal intrapartum CTG patterns in pregnant infected with SARS-CoV-2.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary hospital center. The exposed group consisted of pregnant women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, both symptomatic and asymptomatic were included in the analysis. The control group consisted of randomly selected SARS-CoV-2 negative pregnant women. CTG anomalies were identified according to the physiological interpretation of cardiotocography traces and classified according to the 3-tier system and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist (RCOG)-system. We compared the frequency of CTG anomalies between SARS-CoV-2 positive pregnant women and controls, and between symptomatic and asymptomatic infections.
resultsWe included 119 pregnant women in the case group, of whom 31 were symptomatic (26%), and 116 in the control group. We found no significant differences in maternal and labor characteristics between groups. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences between cases and controls. Perinatal outcomes were similar in the two groups. Major CTG abnormalities were present in 66% of cases versus 72% of controls. Using the three-tier fetal heart rate system, cases and controls can be divided into category I (39 vs. 36%), category II (50 vs. 55%), and category III (12 vs. 9%). CTG characteristics were similar between SARS-CoV-2 positive asymptomatic and symptomatic pregnant women, with no significant differences in the rate of abnormalities.
conclusionUnlike suggested in earlier case-series, CTG abnormalities do not seem more frequent in mild or moderate maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection. No specific CTG-abnormalities were found in these fetuses.
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.