Are obstetric interventions such as cervical ripening, induction of labor, amnioinfusion, or amniotomy associated with umbilical cord prolapse?
Publication/Presentation Date
6-1-1997
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine whether intrapartum obstetric interventions are associated with umbilical cord prolapse.
STUDY DESIGN: A computer search identified patients who had intrapartum umbilical cord prolapse. Thirty-seven cases were identified between 1990 and 1994 (incidence of 1.85 per 1000). These women were randomly matched to control patients with intact membranes.
RESULTS: Patients with umbilical cord prolapse were delivered earlier (34.8 vs 37.1 weeks, p = 0.05). Otherwise, there were no differences between groups regarding the use of cervical ripening, incidence of labor induction, or the use of amnioinfusion and amniotomy. Although cervical dilatation and station were similar between groups at the time of admission, women with umbilical cord prolapse did not have as much descent of the presenting part associated with cervical dilatation and progressive labor compared with control patients.
CONCLUSION: By themselves, obstetric interventions of cervical ripening, labor induction, amnioinfusion, and amniotomy do not increase the likelihood that a patient will have umbilical cord prolapse.
Volume
176
Issue
6
First Page
1181
Last Page
1183
ISSN
0002-9378
Published In/Presented At
Roberts, W. E., Martin, R. W., Roach, H. H., Perry, K. G., Jr, Martin, J. N., Jr, & Morrison, J. C. (1997). Are obstetric interventions such as cervical ripening, induction of labor, amnioinfusion, or amniotomy associated with umbilical cord prolapse?. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 176(6), 1181–1185. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70332-6
Disciplines
Medicine and Health Sciences
PubMedID
9215171
Department(s)
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Document Type
Article