Reviving external cephalic version: a review of its efficacy, safety, and technical aspects
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Currently, the rate of cesarean sections being performed in Korea is approximately 40%, with Korea ranking4th among the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with respect to cesareandeliveries. Breech presentation at term is an important indication for cesarean section among other factors, includingmedicolegal concerns and pregnancies in women of advanced maternal age. Term breech presentation is associatedwith a higher fetal mortality rate than that associated with a cephalic presentation. Therefore, in Korea, most of thesewomen deliver by cesarean section to avoid the complications of vaginal breech delivery. However, cesarean sectionis itself associated with considerable obstetric morbidity and sometimes, mortality. External cephalic version (ECV) is auseful method to reduce the cesarean section rate in women with breech presentation and therefore to reduce theincidence of breech presentation at delivery. Studies have shown that routine use of ECV reduces the cesarean sectionrate by approximately two-thirds in term pregnancies with breech presentation. ECV is accepted as a safe, efficacious,and cost-effective method and is recommended by both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologistsand the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in all pregnancies with term breech presentation, if notcontraindicated. In Korea, although most clinicians are aware of the option of ECV, their relative lack of experiencein performing the procedure and fear of complications render them hesitant to perform ECV. This review is aimed atguiding obstetricians by describing the efficacy, safety concerns, and technical aspects of this procedure.
Abstract
Currently, the rate of cesarean sections being performed in Korea is approximately 40%, with Korea ranking4th among the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with respect to cesareandeliveries. Breech presentation at term is an important indication for cesarean section among other factors, includingmedicolegal concerns and pregnancies in women of advanced maternal age. Term breech presentation is associatedwith a higher fetal mortality rate than that associated with a cephalic presentation. Therefore, in Korea, most of thesewomen deliver by cesarean section to avoid the complications of vaginal breech delivery. However, cesarean sectionis itself associated with considerable obstetric morbidity and sometimes, mortality. External cephalic version (ECV) is auseful method to reduce the cesarean section rate in women with breech presentation and therefore to reduce theincidence of breech presentation at delivery. Studies have shown that routine use of ECV reduces the cesarean sectionrate by approximately two-thirds in term pregnancies with breech presentation. ECV is accepted as a safe, efficacious,and cost-effective method and is recommended by both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologistsand the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in all pregnancies with term breech presentation, if notcontraindicated. In Korea, although most clinicians are aware of the option of ECV, their relative lack of experiencein performing the procedure and fear of complications render them hesitant to perform ECV. This review is aimed atguiding obstetricians by describing the efficacy, safety concerns, and technical aspects of this procedure.
참고문헌 (58)
- Hofmeyr GJ, "External cephalic version for breech presentation at term", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, pp.CD000083~ (2015)
- Martin JA, "Birth : final data for 2016", Natl Vital Stat Rep, 67, pp.1~55 (2018)
- Hannah ME, "Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term : a randomised multicentre trial", Lancet, 356, pp.1375~1383 (2000)
- Martin JA, "Births : final data for 2002", Natl Vital Stat Rep, 52, pp.1~113 (2003)
- Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, "OECD health at a glance 2017: OECD indicators" (2017), OECD publishing
- World Health Organization, "WHO statement on caesarean section rates" (2015), WHO
- Gabay M, "Unnecessary cesarean sections:curing a national epidemic" (1994), Public Citizen Health Research Group
- Tan JM, "Cost-effectiveness of external cephalic version for term breech presentation", BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 10, pp.3~ (2010)
- American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, "Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists number 13: external cephalic version", ACOG, ~ (2000)
- Coco AS, "External cephalic version", Am Fam Physician, 58, pp.731~738 (1998)
- Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, "External cephalic version and reducing the incidence of term breech presentation (green-top guideline No. 20a)" (2017), RCOG
- American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, "Practice bulletin No. 161: external cephalic version", ACOG, ~ (2016)
- Rosman AN, "Patients’ and professionals’barriers and facilitators to external cephalic version for breech presentation at term, a qualitative analysis in the Netherlands", Midwifery, 30, pp.324~330 (2014)
- Zhang J, "Efficacy of external cephalic version : a review", Obstet Gynecol, 82, pp.306~312 (1993)
- Collins S, "The complications of external cephalic version : results from 805 consecutive attempts", BJOG, 114, pp.636~638 (2007)
- Paul C, "The baby is for turning : external cephalic version", BJOG, 124, pp.773~ (2017)
- Bradley-Watson PJ, "The decreasing value of external cephalic version in modern obstetric practice", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 123, pp.237~240 (1975)
- "External cephalic version and reducing the incidence of term breech presentation: green-top guideline No. 20a", BJOG, 124, pp.e178~e192 (2017)
- Hutton EK, "External cephalic version of breech presentation before term", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, pp.CD000084~ (2015)
- Ferguson JE 2nd, "Intrapartum external cephalic version", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 152, pp.297~298 (1985)
- Kaneti H, "Intrapartum external cephalic version of footling-breech presentation", Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 79, pp.1083~1085 (2000)
- Suyama F, "The outcomes and risk factors of fetal bradycardia associated with external cephalic version", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 32, pp.922~926 (2019)
- Sela HY, "Safety and efficacy of external cephalic version for women with a previous cesarean delivery", Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 142, pp.111~114 (2009)
- Burgos J, "Is external cephalic version at term contraindicated in previous cesarean section? A prospective comparative cohort study", BJOG, 121, pp.230~235 (2014)
- Rosman AN, "Contraindications for external cephalic version in breech position at term : a systematic review", Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 92, pp.137~142 (2013)
- Ebner F, "Predictors for a successful external cephalic version : a single centre experience", Arch Gynecol Obstet, 293, pp.749~755 (2016)
- El-Toukhy T, "Impact of parity on obstetric and neonatal outcome of external cephalic version", J Obstet Gynaecol, 27, pp.580~584 (2007)
- Melo P, "External cephalic version at term : a cohort study of 18years’ experience", BJOG, 126, pp.493~499 (2019)
- Nassar N, "Outcomes of external cephalic version and breech presentation at term, an audit of deliveries at a Sydney tertiary obstetric hospital, 1997–2004", Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 85, pp.1231~1238 (2006)
- Ben-Meir A, "Prognostic parameters for successful external cephalic version", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 21, pp.660~662 (2008)
- Kok M, "Prediction of success of external cephalic version after 36weeks", Am J Perinatol, 28, pp.103~110 (2011)
- Boucher M, "The relationship between amniotic fluid index and successful external cephalic version : a 14-year experience", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 189, pp.751~754 (2003)
- Kok M, "Ultrasound factors to predict the outcome of external cephalic version : a meta-analysis", Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 33, pp.76~84 (2009)
- Haas DM, "External cephalic version with an amniotic fluid index < or =10 : a systematic review", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 18, pp.249~252 (2005)
- Burgos J, "Does fetal weight estimated by ultrasound really affect the success rate of external cephalic version", Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 88, pp.1101~1106 (2009)
- Velzel J, "Prediction models for successful external cephalic version : a systematic review", Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 195, pp.160~167 (2015)
- Chauhary S, "The impact of maternal body mass index on external cephalic version success", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 32, pp.2159~2165 (2019)
- Hofmeyr GJ, "Effect of external cephalic version in late pregnancy on breech presentation and caesarean section rate : a controlled trial", Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 90, pp.392~399 (1983)
- Lim PS, "Successful external cephalic version : factors predicting vaginal birth", ScientificWorld-Journal, 2014, pp.860107~ (2014)
- Burgos J, "Probability of cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version", Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 131, pp.192~195 (2015)
- de Hundt M, "Risk factors for cesarean section and instrumental vaginal delivery after successful external cephalic version", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 29, pp.2005~2007 (2016)
- de Hundt M, "Mode of delivery after successful external cephalic version : a systematic review and meta-analysis", Obstet Gynecol, 123, pp.1327~1334 (2014)
- Kuppens SM, "Fetal heart rate abnormalities during and after external cephalic version : which fetuses are at risk and how are they delivered", BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 17, pp.363~ (2017)
- Collaris RJ, "External cephalic version : a safe procedure? A systematic review of version-related risks", Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 83, pp.511~518 (2004)
- Hofmeyr GJ, "Cardiotocographic changes after external cephalic version", Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 90, pp.914~918 (1983)
- Nassar N, "Systematic review of adverse outcomes of external cephalic version and persisting breech presentation at term", Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol, 20, pp.163~171 (2006)
- Nassar N, "Outcomes of external cephalic version and breech presentation at term, an audit of deliveries at a Sydney tertiary obstetric hospital, 1997–2004", Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 85, pp.1231~1238 (2006)
- Boucher M, "Fetomaternal hemorrhage during external cephalic version", Obstet Gynecol, 112, pp.79~84 (2008)
- Grootscholten K, "External cephalic version-related risks : a meta-analysis", Obstet Gynecol, 112, pp.1143~1151 (2008)
- Tong Leung VK, "External cephalic version does not increase the risk of intra-uterine death : a 17-year experience and literature review", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 25, pp.1774~1778 (2012)
- Balayla J, "Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes following unsuccessful external cephalic version : a stratified analysis amongst failures, successes, and controls", J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 28, pp.605~610 (2015)
- Son M, "Association between attempted external cephalic version and perinatal morbidity and mortality", Obstet Gynecol, 132, pp.365~370 (2018)
- Kirkinen P, "Ultrasonic examination before external version of breech presentation", Gynecol Obstet Invest, 13, pp.90~97 (1982)
- Donald WL, "Ultrasonography and external cephalic version at term", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 162, pp.1542~1545 (1990)
- Impey L, "Tocolysis for repeat external cephalic version in breech presentation at term : a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial", BJOG, 112, pp.627~631 (2005)
- Magro-Malosso ER, "Neuraxial analgesia to increase the success rate of external cephalic version : a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 215, pp.276~286 (2016)
- Cluver C, "Interventions for helping to turn term breech babies to head first presentation when using external cephalic version", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, pp.CD000184~ (2015)
- "External cephalic version and reducing the incidence of term breech presentation: green-top guideline No. 20a", BJOG, 124, pp.e178~e192 (2017)