Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 2.1 (5-Year IF – 2.0)
Journal Citation Indicator (JCI) (2023) – 0.4
Scopus CiteScore – 3.7 (CiteScore Tracker – 4.2)
Index Copernicus  – 171.00; MNiSW – 70 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2016, vol. 25, nr 2, March-April, p. 309–316

doi: 10.17219/acem/60842

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring Using Maternal Abdominal Surface Electrodes in Third Trimester: Can We Obtain Additional Information Other than CTG Trace?

Tomasz Fuchs1,A,B,D,F, Krzysztof Grobelak1,B,C,D,F, Michał Pomorski1,C,D,E,F, Mariusz Zimmer1,C,E,F

1 2nd Department and Clinic of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland

Abstract

Background. Cardiotocography (CTG) is the most widely used procedure despite its low specificity for fetal acidosis and poor perinatal outcome. Fetal electrocardiography (fECG) with transabdominal electrodes is a new, non-invasive and promising method with greater potential for detecting impairment of fetal circulation. This study is the first that attempts to assess the usefulness of fECG in comparison to CTG during antepartum period.
Objectives. To determine if a single fECG examination along with CTG tracing and Doppler flow measurement in the fetal vessels has any additional clinical value in normal and intrauterine growth restricted (IUGR) fetuses.
Material and Methods. The study included 93 pregnancies with IUGR, 37 pregnancies with IUGR and brain sparing effect, and 324 healthy pregnant women. The T/QRS ratio, cerebro-placental ratio (CRP), and CTG tracings were analyzed. One-way analysis of variance and Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient were applied. The relationship between results of the T/QRS ratio and CTG examination among the study groups was analyzed.
Results. The highest average mean value of the T/QRS ratio was recorded in the IUGR group with a normal CPR and a pathologic CTG (0.235 ± 0.014). The highest average maximum values were observed in the groups of IUGR pregnancies with a reduced CPR with normal (0.309 ± 0.100), suspicious (0.330 ± 0.102) and pathologic (0.319 ± 0.056) CTGs. Analysis of variance revealed differences between study groups regarding maximum values and the difference between maximum and minimal values of T/QRS. Correlations between groups were insignificant.
Conclusion. Higher values of T/QRS ratio in IUGR pregnancies with normal and reduced CPR than in control group regardless of the result of CTG examination may indicate minimal worsening of intrauterine fetal well-being in growth retarded fetuses. No relationship between fECG examination and CTG tracings suggests that a single fECG does not provide any additional clinically significant information determining the condition of the fetus; however, further studies are required.

Key words

cardiotocography, fetal growth restriction, fetal heart rate, fetal electrocardiography, antepartum fetal monitoring

References (28)

  1. Pattison N, McCowan L: Cardiotocography for antepartum fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000, 2, CD001068.
  2. Sameni R, Clifford GD: A Review of Fetal ECG Signal Processing; Issues and Promising Directions. Open Pacing Electrophysiol Ther J 2010, 1, 4–20.
  3. Rosen KG, Amer-Wahlin I, Luzietti R, Noren H: Fetal ECG waveform analysis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004, 18, 485–514.
  4. Rosen KG, Lindecrantz K: STAN – the Gothenburg model for fetal surveillance during labour by ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 1989, 10, Suppl B, 51–56.
  5. Adam J: The future of fetal monitoring. Rev Obstet Gynecol 2012, 5, 132–136.
  6. Kotas M, Jezewski J, Horoba K, Matonia A: Application of spatio-temporal filtering to fetal electrocardiogram enhancement. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2011, 104, 1–9.
  7. Jezewski J, Matonia A, Kupka T, Roj D, Czabanski R: Determination of fetal heart rate from abdominal signals: evaluation of beat-to-beat accuracy in relation to the direct fetal electrocardiogram. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2012, 57, 383–394.
  8. Gramellini D, Folli MC, Raboni S, Vadora E, Merialdi A: Cerebral-umbilical Doppler ratio as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 1992, 79, 416–420.
  9. Westgate J, Harris M, Curnow JS, Greene KR: Plymouth randomized trial of cardiotocogram only vs. ST waveform plus cardiotocogram for intrapartum monitoring in 2400 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993, 169, 1151–1160.
  10. Ayres-de-Campos D, Bernardes J: Twenty-five years after the FIGO guidelines for the use of fetal monitoring: time for a simplified approach? Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2010, 110, 1–6.
  11. Alfirevic Z, Devane D, Gyte GM: Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013, 5, CD006066.
  12. Zimmer M, Hirnle L, Fuchs T, Florjanski J, Tomialowicz M, Klosek A, Milnerowicz-Nabzdyk E: The influence of computer supervision of deliveries on the medical procedures during labor and neonatal post-delivery status. Ginekol Pol 2000, 71, 187–191.
  13. Sweha A, Hacker TW, Nuovo J: Interpretation of the electronic fetal heart rate during labor. Am Fam Physician 1999, 59, 2487–2500.
  14. Guzman ER, Vintzileos AM, Martins M, Benito C, Houlihan C, Hanley M: The efficacy of individual computer heart rate indices in detecting acidemia at birth in growth-restricted fetuses. Obstet Gynecol 1996, 87, 969–974.
  15. Hecher K, Bilardo CM, Stigter RH, Ville Y, Hackeloer BJ, Kok HJ, Senat MV, Visser GH: Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: a longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001, 18, 564–570.
  16. Ribbert LS, Snijders RJ, Nicolaides KH, Visser GH: Relation of fetal blood gases and data from computer-assisted analysis of fetal heart rate patterns in small for gestation fetuses. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991, 98, 820–823.
  17. Anceschi MM, Ruozi-Berretta A, Piazze JJ, Cosmi E, Cerekja A, Meloni P, Cosmi EV: Computerized cardiotocography in the management of intrauterine growth restriction associated with Doppler velocimetry alterations. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004, 86, 365–370.
  18. Potti S, Berghella V: ST waveform analysis versus cardiotocography alone for intrapartum fetal monitoring: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am J Perinatol 2012, 29, 657–664.
  19. Salmelin A, Wiklund I, Bottinga R, Brorsson B, Ekman-Ordeberg G, Grimfors EE, Hanson U, Blom M, Persson E: Fetal monitoring with computerized ST analysis during labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013, 92, 28–39.
  20. Westgate JA, Bennet L, Brabyn C, Williams CE, Gunn AJ: ST waveform changes during repeated umbilical cord occlusions in near-term fetal sheep. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001, 184, 743–751.
  21. Rosen KG, Kjellmer I: Changes in the fetal heart rate and ECG during hypoxia. Acta Physiol Scand 1975, 93, 59–66.
  22. Greene KR, Dawes GS, Lilja H, Rosen KG: Changes in the ST waveform of the fetal lamb electrocardiogram with hypoxemia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982, 144, 950–958.
  23. Olofsson P, Ayres-de-Campos D, Kessler J, Tendal B, Yli BM, Devoe L: A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part I: The randomized controlled trials. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2014, 93, 556–568.
  24. Fuchs T: Values of T/QRS ratios measured during normal and post-term pregnancies. J Perinat Med 2014, 42, 349–357.
  25. Bahado-Singh RO, Kovanci E, Jeffres A, Oz U, Deren O, Copel J, Mari G: The Doppler cerebroplacental ratio and perinatal outcome in intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999, 180, 750–756.
  26. Arias F: Accuracy of the middle-cerebral-to-umbilical-artery resistance index ratio in the prediction of neonatal outcome in patients at high risk for fetal and neonatal complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994, 171, 1541–1545.
  27. Baschat AA, Gembruch U: The cerebroplacental Doppler ratio revisited. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003, 21, 124–127.
  28. Odibo AO, Riddick C, Pare E, Stamilio DM, Macones GA: Cerebroplacental Doppler ratio and adverse perinatal outcomes in intrauterine growth restriction: evaluating the impact of using gestational age-specific reference values. J Ultrasound Med 2005, 24, 1223–1228.
© Wroclaw Medical University