Cargando…

A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring

BACKGROUND: Cardiotocography (CTG) is worldwide the method for fetal surveillance during labour. However, CTG alone shows many false positive test results and without fetal blood sampling (FBS), it results in an increase in operative deliveries without improvement of fetal outcome. FBS requires addi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Westerhuis, Michelle EMH, Moons, Karel GM, van Beek, Erik, Bijvoet, Saskia M, Drogtrop, Addy P, van Geijn, Herman P, van Lith, Jan MM, Mol, Ben WJ, Nijhuis, Jan G, Oei, S Guid, Porath, Martina M, Rijnders, Robbert JP, Schuitemaker, Nico WE, van der Tweel, Ingeborg, Visser, Gerard HA, Willekes, Christine, Kwee, Anneke
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1976105/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17655764
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-7-13
_version_ 1782135063031316480
author Westerhuis, Michelle EMH
Moons, Karel GM
van Beek, Erik
Bijvoet, Saskia M
Drogtrop, Addy P
van Geijn, Herman P
van Lith, Jan MM
Mol, Ben WJ
Nijhuis, Jan G
Oei, S Guid
Porath, Martina M
Rijnders, Robbert JP
Schuitemaker, Nico WE
van der Tweel, Ingeborg
Visser, Gerard HA
Willekes, Christine
Kwee, Anneke
author_facet Westerhuis, Michelle EMH
Moons, Karel GM
van Beek, Erik
Bijvoet, Saskia M
Drogtrop, Addy P
van Geijn, Herman P
van Lith, Jan MM
Mol, Ben WJ
Nijhuis, Jan G
Oei, S Guid
Porath, Martina M
Rijnders, Robbert JP
Schuitemaker, Nico WE
van der Tweel, Ingeborg
Visser, Gerard HA
Willekes, Christine
Kwee, Anneke
author_sort Westerhuis, Michelle EMH
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cardiotocography (CTG) is worldwide the method for fetal surveillance during labour. However, CTG alone shows many false positive test results and without fetal blood sampling (FBS), it results in an increase in operative deliveries without improvement of fetal outcome. FBS requires additional expertise, is invasive and has often to be repeated during labour. Two clinical trials have shown that a combination of CTG and ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) reduces the rates of metabolic acidosis and instrumental delivery. However, in both trials FBS was still performed in the ST-analysis arm, and it is therefore still unknown if the observed results were indeed due to the ST-analysis or to the use of FBS in combination with ST-analysis. METHODS/DESIGN: We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of non-invasive monitoring (CTG + ST-analysis) as compared to normal care (CTG + FBS), in a multicentre randomised clinical trial setting. Secondary aims are: 1) to judge whether ST-analysis of fetal electrocardiogram can significantly decrease frequency of performance of FBS or even replace it; 2) perform a cost analysis to establish the economic impact of the two treatment options. Women in labour with a gestational age ≥ 36 weeks and an indication for CTG-monitoring can be included in the trial. Eligible women will be randomised for fetal surveillance with CTG and, if necessary, FBS or CTG combined with ST-analysis of the fetal ECG. The primary outcome of the study is the incidence of serious metabolic acidosis (defined as pH < 7.05 and Bd(ecf )> 12 mmol/L in the umbilical cord artery). Secondary outcome measures are: instrumental delivery, neonatal outcome (Apgar score, admission to a neonatal ward), incidence of performance of FBS in both arms and cost-effectiveness of both monitoring strategies across hospitals. The analysis will follow the intention to treat principle. The incidence of metabolic acidosis will be compared across both groups. Assuming a reduction of metabolic acidosis from 3.5% to 2.1 %, using a two-sided test with an alpha of 0.05 and a power of 0.80, in favour of CTG plus ST-analysis, about 5100 women have to be randomised. Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness of CTG and ST-analysis as compared to CTG and FBS will be studied. DISCUSSION: This study will provide data about the use of intrapartum ST-analysis with a strict protocol for performance of FBS to limit its incidence. We aim to clarify to what extent intrapartum ST-analysis can be used without the performance of FBS and in which cases FBS is still needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN95732366
format Text
id pubmed-1976105
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-19761052007-09-12 A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring Westerhuis, Michelle EMH Moons, Karel GM van Beek, Erik Bijvoet, Saskia M Drogtrop, Addy P van Geijn, Herman P van Lith, Jan MM Mol, Ben WJ Nijhuis, Jan G Oei, S Guid Porath, Martina M Rijnders, Robbert JP Schuitemaker, Nico WE van der Tweel, Ingeborg Visser, Gerard HA Willekes, Christine Kwee, Anneke BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Cardiotocography (CTG) is worldwide the method for fetal surveillance during labour. However, CTG alone shows many false positive test results and without fetal blood sampling (FBS), it results in an increase in operative deliveries without improvement of fetal outcome. FBS requires additional expertise, is invasive and has often to be repeated during labour. Two clinical trials have shown that a combination of CTG and ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) reduces the rates of metabolic acidosis and instrumental delivery. However, in both trials FBS was still performed in the ST-analysis arm, and it is therefore still unknown if the observed results were indeed due to the ST-analysis or to the use of FBS in combination with ST-analysis. METHODS/DESIGN: We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of non-invasive monitoring (CTG + ST-analysis) as compared to normal care (CTG + FBS), in a multicentre randomised clinical trial setting. Secondary aims are: 1) to judge whether ST-analysis of fetal electrocardiogram can significantly decrease frequency of performance of FBS or even replace it; 2) perform a cost analysis to establish the economic impact of the two treatment options. Women in labour with a gestational age ≥ 36 weeks and an indication for CTG-monitoring can be included in the trial. Eligible women will be randomised for fetal surveillance with CTG and, if necessary, FBS or CTG combined with ST-analysis of the fetal ECG. The primary outcome of the study is the incidence of serious metabolic acidosis (defined as pH < 7.05 and Bd(ecf )> 12 mmol/L in the umbilical cord artery). Secondary outcome measures are: instrumental delivery, neonatal outcome (Apgar score, admission to a neonatal ward), incidence of performance of FBS in both arms and cost-effectiveness of both monitoring strategies across hospitals. The analysis will follow the intention to treat principle. The incidence of metabolic acidosis will be compared across both groups. Assuming a reduction of metabolic acidosis from 3.5% to 2.1 %, using a two-sided test with an alpha of 0.05 and a power of 0.80, in favour of CTG plus ST-analysis, about 5100 women have to be randomised. Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness of CTG and ST-analysis as compared to CTG and FBS will be studied. DISCUSSION: This study will provide data about the use of intrapartum ST-analysis with a strict protocol for performance of FBS to limit its incidence. We aim to clarify to what extent intrapartum ST-analysis can be used without the performance of FBS and in which cases FBS is still needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN95732366 BioMed Central 2007-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC1976105/ /pubmed/17655764 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-7-13 Text en Copyright © 2007 Westerhuis et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Westerhuis, Michelle EMH
Moons, Karel GM
van Beek, Erik
Bijvoet, Saskia M
Drogtrop, Addy P
van Geijn, Herman P
van Lith, Jan MM
Mol, Ben WJ
Nijhuis, Jan G
Oei, S Guid
Porath, Martina M
Rijnders, Robbert JP
Schuitemaker, Nico WE
van der Tweel, Ingeborg
Visser, Gerard HA
Willekes, Christine
Kwee, Anneke
A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
title A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
title_full A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
title_fullStr A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
title_full_unstemmed A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
title_short A randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus ST-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (STAN(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
title_sort randomised clinical trial on cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus cardiotocography plus st-analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram (stan(®)) for intrapartum monitoring
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1976105/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17655764
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-7-13
work_keys_str_mv AT westerhuismichelleemh arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT moonskarelgm arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vanbeekerik arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT bijvoetsaskiam arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT drogtropaddyp arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vangeijnhermanp arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vanlithjanmm arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT molbenwj arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT nijhuisjang arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT oeisguid arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT porathmartinam arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT rijndersrobbertjp arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT schuitemakernicowe arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vandertweelingeborg arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vissergerardha arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT willekeschristine arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT kweeanneke arandomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT westerhuismichelleemh randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT moonskarelgm randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vanbeekerik randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT bijvoetsaskiam randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT drogtropaddyp randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vangeijnhermanp randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vanlithjanmm randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT molbenwj randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT nijhuisjang randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT oeisguid randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT porathmartinam randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT rijndersrobbertjp randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT schuitemakernicowe randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vandertweelingeborg randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT vissergerardha randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT willekeschristine randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring
AT kweeanneke randomisedclinicaltrialoncardiotocographyplusfetalbloodsamplingversuscardiotocographyplusstanalysisofthefetalelectrocardiogramstanforintrapartummonitoring