ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Intrapartum cardiac telemetry monitoring in patients with cardiovascular disease.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are no guidelines for cardiac telemetry monitoring during labor and delivery in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). We sought to identify factors influencing provider recommendations for intrapartum telemetry monitoring and associated outcomes.
methodsThis is a single-center, cohort study comparing cardiovascular outcomes during the antepartum, intrapartum, and postpartum periods between those who received telemetry and those who did not. Clinically significant arrhythmic events (CSAEs) were assessed in all patients.
resultsAmong 717 pregnancies in patients with CVD, 94 (13.1%) had antepartum recommendations for telemetry. Type of CVD differed between those with and without telemetry recommendations (P < 0.001), with a higher proportion of individuals with arrhythmias in the recommended telemetry group. These pregnancies were also more likely to present with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class ≥ 2 at enrollment (12.8 vs. 5.3%, P = 0.008), new antepartum arrhythmia (26.6 vs. 2.1%, P < 0.001), and greater use of beta blockers (55.3 vs. 27.9%, P < 0.001), anti-arrhythmic medications (16.0 vs. 2.1%, P < 0.001), or calcium channel blockers (8.5 vs. 2.1%, P = 0.002). Telemetry was used in 77 vaginal deliveries (10.7%) and all 261 cesarean deliveries. Only one patient monitored with telemetry experienced an intrapartum CSAE (0.3%). There were no CSAEs in patients not monitored on telemetry.
conclusionsCardiac telemetry monitoring has a limited impact on the intrapartum management of patients with CVD. Further studies are needed to identify which patients may benefit most from intrapartum telemetry.
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.