Prenatal Predictors of Cesarean Section Due to Labor Arrest

Overview

Journal Arch Gynecol Obstet

Specialty Gynecology & Obstetrics

Date 1995 Jan 1

PMID 7611821

Citations 2

Authors

D M Harper

C A Johnson

W H HARPER

B S Liese

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Cesarean section due to labor arrest occurs because the fetus is too large for the maternal outlet tract. If these women could be identified prior to labor, patient management could be optimized for both the clinician and the woman. A case-control study was designed to identify predictors of Cesarean section due to labor arrest. A five year retrospective review identified 32 cases and 329 controls with complete data for the prenatal maternal variables. Both cases and controls were considered for the stepwise logistic regression model. The prenatal variables predicting Cesarean section due to labor arrest are parity, history of past macrosomia, maternal age, term fundal height and maternal height. This model can be considered a pilot model that can be tested in a large international/inter-ethnic population.

Citing Articles

Maternal height and risk of caesarean section in singleton births in Sweden-A population-based study using data from the Swedish Pregnancy Register 2011 to 2016.

Mogren I, Lindqvist M, Petersson K, Nilses C, Small R, Granasen G PLoS One. 2018; 13(5):e0198124.

PMID: 29813118 PMC: 5973605. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198124.

Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement in predicting failed labor induction and cesarean delivery for failure to progress in nulliparous women.

Park K J Korean Med Sci. 2007; 22(4):722-7.

PMID: 17728517 PMC: 2693827. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2007.22.4.722.

References

Belizan J, Villar J, Nardin J, Malamud J, De Vicurna L . Diagnosis of intrauterine growth retardation by a simple clinical method: measurement of uterine height. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978; 131(6):643-6. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(78)90824-4. View

Calvert J, Crean E, Newcombe R, Pearson J . Antenatal screening by measurement of symphysis-fundus height. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982; 285(6345):846-9. PMC: 1499711. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.285.6345.846. View

Parsons M, Winegar A, Siefert L, Spellacy W . Pregnancy outcomes in short women. J Reprod Med. 1989; 34(5):357-61. View

Klebanoff M, Mills J, BERENDES H . Mother's birth weight as a predictor of macrosomia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985; 153(3):253-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(85)80107-1. View

Handa V, Laros R . Active-phase arrest in labor: predictors of cesarean delivery in a nulliparous population. Obstet Gynecol. 1993; 81(5 ( Pt 1)):758-63. View

Rogers M, Needham P . Evaluation of fundal height measurement in antenatal care. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985; 25(2):87-90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1985.tb00614.x. View

Hughes A, Jenkins D, Newcombe R, Pearson J . Symphysis-fundus height, maternal height, labor pattern, and mode of delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987; 156(3):644-8. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(87)90069-x. View

Kiserud T . Fundal height growth in rural Africa. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1986; 65(7):713-5. DOI: 10.3109/00016348609161487. View

KALTREIDER D . Criteria of midplane contraction. What is their value?. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1952; 63(2):392-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(15)32834-9. View

10.

Stuart J, Healy T, Sutton M, Swingler G . Symphysis-fundus measurements in screening for small-for-dates infants: a community based study in Gloucestershire. J R Coll Gen Pract. 1989; 39(319):45-8. PMC: 1711768. View

11.

Persson B, Stangenberg M, LUNELL N, Brodin U, Holmberg N, Vaclavinkova V . Prediction of size of infants at birth by measurement of symphysis fundus height. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1986; 93(3):206-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1986.tb07894.x. View

12.

Hanzal E, Kainz C, Hoffmann G, Deutinger J . An analysis of the prediction of cephalopelvic disproportion. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 1993; 253(4):161-6. DOI: 10.1007/BF02766641. View

13.

Cnattingius S, Axelsson O, Eklund G, Lindmark G . Screening for intrauterine growth retardation in late pregnancy. Early Hum Dev. 1985; 10(3-4):225-35. DOI: 10.1016/0378-3782(85)90053-2. View

14.

Parks D, ZIEL H . Macrosomia. A proposed indication for primary cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol. 1978; 52(4):407-9. View

15.

Peaceman A, Adashek J, Socol M . A controlled trial of a program for the active management of labor. N Engl J Med. 1992; 326(7):450-4. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199202133260705. View

16.

Mahmood T, Campbell D, Wilson A . Maternal height, shoe size, and outcome of labour in white primigravidas: a prospective anthropometric study. BMJ. 1988; 297(6647):515-7. PMC: 1840354. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.297.6647.515. View

17.

Adadevoh S, Hobbs C, Elkins T . The relation of the true conjugate to maternal height and obstetric performance in Ghanaians. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1989; 28(3):243-51. DOI: 10.1016/0020-7292(89)90725-x. View

18.

Kappel B, Eriksen G, Hansen K, Hvidman L, Krag-Olsen B, Nielsen J . Short stature in Scandinavian women. An obstetrical risk factor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1987; 66(2):153-8. DOI: 10.3109/00016348709083038. View

19.

Wallin A, GYLLENSWARD A, WESTIN B . Symphysis-fundus measurement in prediction of fetal growth disturbances. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1981; 60(3):317-23. DOI: 10.3109/00016348109158139. View

20.

Quaranta P, Currell R, Redman C, Robinson J . Prediction of small-for-dates infants by measurement of symphysial-fundal-height. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1981; 88(2):115-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1981.tb00952.x. View