Cargando…
Standard External Doppler Fetal Heart Tracings versus External Fetal Electrocardiogram in Very Preterm Gestation: A Pilot Study
Introduction Very preterm babies can be difficult to monitor using standard external Doppler fetal heart tracings (eFHR). External fetal electrocardiogram (fECG) is a potential alternative. Methods This was a prospective observational pilot study of hospitalized patients at 24 to 28 weeks' gest...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Thieme Medical Publishers
2016
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5097041/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27822432 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1592413 |
Sumario: | Introduction Very preterm babies can be difficult to monitor using standard external Doppler fetal heart tracings (eFHR). External fetal electrocardiogram (fECG) is a potential alternative. Methods This was a prospective observational pilot study of hospitalized patients at 24 to 28 weeks' gestation. A total of 30 women were traced for up to 2 hours using eFHR followed by up to 2 hours using fECG. The percentage of time the fetal heart rate was traced during the 2-hour window for each modality was calculated. Differences of ≥ 60, ≥ 80, and ≥ 90% total time traced were compared between modalities using McNemar's test. Differences were also assessed for each method between nonobese (body mass index [BMI] < 30 kg/m(2)) and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2)) women using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Results Superior performance was found with eFHR at ≥ 60% (93.3 vs. 46.7%, p < 0.001), ≥ 80% (80.0 vs. 30.0%, p < 0.001), and ≥ 90% (60.0 vs. 23.3%, p < 0.01) total time traced. There was a statistically significant finding favoring nonobese women at ≥ 80% total time traced using fECG (7.1 vs. 50.0%, p = 0.017). Conclusion With current technology fECG performance in very preterm gestation was worse than conventional eFHR, although fECG may have a role in nonobese patients. |
---|