4.6 Article

Relationship between fetal head station established using an open magnetic resonance imaging scanner and the angle of progression determined by transperineal ultrasound

Journal

ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Volume 37, Issue 6, Pages 712-716

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/uog.8944

Keywords

angle of progression; fetal head station; labor; open magnetic resonance imaging; transperineal; ultrasonography

Funding

  1. TSB Technologiestiftung Berlin-Zukunftsfonds Berlin
  2. European Union

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective We investigated the correlation between the angle of progression measured by transperineal ultrasound and fetal head station measured by open magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the gold standard, in pregnant women at full term. Methods Thirty-one pregnant women at full term with a fetus in the occipitoanterior position were enrolled. First, the distance between the leading part of the skull and the interspinal plane was obtained using an open MRI system with the patient in a supine position. Immediately after MRI, the angle of progression was obtained by transperineal ultrasound without changing the woman's posture. Results There was a significant correlation between the angle of progression determined by transperineal sonography and the distance between the presenting fetal part and the level of the maternal ischial spines (y = -0.51x + 60.8, r(2) = 0.38, P < 0.001). None of the fetal heads was engaged at the time of MRI and ultrasound examinations. Conclusions The present study demonstrated a predictable relationship between the angle of progression obtained by transperineal ultrasound and the traditional scale used to quantify fetal head descent. Based on our results, station 0 would correspond to a 120 degrees angle of progression. However, this correlation is based on statistical assumptions only and has to be proven in future studies. Copyright (C) 2011 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available