Fetal pulse oximetry: current issues
Fetal pulse oximetry: current issues
复制标题
胎儿脉搏血氧饱和度：当前问题
DOI：
10.1515/jpm.2001.001
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. Dildy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. Dildy
An often cited meta-analysis of twelve randomized clinical trials involving 258,855 pregnant women comparing intermittent auscultation (IA) with EFM reported that the only clear benefits of EFM over IA are a reduction in low (< 4) oneminute Apgar scores (RR 5 0.82, 95 % CI 5 0.6520.98) and neonatal seizures (R. R. 5 0.50, 95 % C. I. 5 0.3020.82), with no statistical differences in other outcome parameters such as perinatal death or neonatal intensive care admission, at the expense of a significant increase in cesarean section rate (R. R. 5 1.21, 95 % C. I. 5 1.0421.39) in the EFM group [45]. Another meta-analysis of nine randomized trials involving 18,561 patients concluded that EFM reduced hypoxia related deaths by 60 % and prevented one perinatal death per 1,000 deliveries, at the expense of increased operative vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery on the order of 223 times that of the IA group [49]. While there appears to be certain advantages of EFM over IA, most would agree that there remain significant disadvantages. The limitations of EFM are primarily based upon the inherent subjective nature of its interpretation and a high false positive rate which adversely affect specificity and
