Добавил:
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Книги по МРТ КТ на английском языке / MRI and CT of the Female Pelvis Hamm B., Forstner R..pdf
Скачиваний:
4
Добавлен:
05.10.2023
Размер:
41.73 Mб
Скачать

464

L. Schäffer et al.

 

 

and 10–15% of multiple pregnancies, but there is no agreement about its most suitable obstetric management. The Canadian Medical Research Council (MRC) initiated an international randomized multicenter trial of planned vaginal birth versus planned cesarean section for breech presentation at term after an ­uncomplicated pregnancy (Hannah et al. 2000). The results show that planned cesarean section reduces the fetal complication rate while not affecting the maternal complication rate, and the authors conclude that planned cesarean section is the optimal method of delivery for a fetus in breech presentation.

Following publication of these results, the rate of primary cesarean sections for breech presentations increased to up to 80%. Nevertheless, spontaneous delivery in breech presentation may be the preferred option of the mother. In such cases, it is particularly important to exclude cephalopelvic disproportion.

5.2\ After Cesarean Section

due to Arrest of Labor

The probability of secondary cesarean section after spontaneous onset of labor is about 10% in women without prior cesarean section as opposed to 30–50% in women having had a cesarean section for dystocia before (Abilgaard et al. 2013). In order to reduce the rate of secondary cesarean section, we perform pelvimetry in these patients when high suspicion for cephalopelvic disproportion is present and recommend primary cesarean section for future pregnancies in those women who are found to have a narrow pelvis because they are at high risk of renewed arrest of labor.

5.3\ Clinically Conspicuous

Abnormalities of Pelvic Shape

and Status Post Pelvic

Fracture

Only 0.5–1% of all pregnant women have such obvious pelvic anomalies that absolute cephalopelvic disproportion is highly likely. The risk of absolute disproportion is especially high in

women after pelvic fracture or with diseases that alter pelvic shape (osteochondroplasia, osteomalacia). In these cases, pelvimetry is mandatory.

References

Abilgaard H et al (2013) Cervical dilation at the time of cesarean section for dystocia – effect on subsequent trial of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 92:193–197 Angioli R, Gomez-Marin O, Cantuaria G, O’Sullivan JM (2000) Severe perineal lacerations during vaginal delivery: the University of Miami experience. Am

J Obstet Gynecol 182:1083–1085

Baker PN, Johnson IR, Harvey PR, Gowland PA, Mansfield P (1994) A three-year follow-up of children imaged in utero with echo-planar magnetic resonance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 170:32–33

Cardozo LD, Gibb DM, Studd JW et al (1982) Predictive value of cervimetric labour patterns in primigravidae. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 82:33–38

D’Souza R et al (2013) Cesarean section on maternal request for non-medical reasons. Best Practice Res Clini Obstetrics Gynaeco 27(2):165–177

DeWilde JP, Rivers AW, Price DL (2005) A review of the current use of magnetic resonance imaging in pregnancy and safety implications for the fetus. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 87:335–353

Doll R, Wakeford R (1997) Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation. Br J Radiol 70:130–139

Fox LK, Huerta-Enochian GS, Hamlin JA, Katz VL (2004) The magnetic resonance imaging-based fetal-­ pelvic index: a pilot study in the community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:1679–1688

Friedman EA (1955) Primigravid labor. Obstet Gynecol 6:567–589

Friedman EA (1956) Labor in multiparae. Obstet Gynecol 8:691–703

Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA et al (2000) Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet 356:1375–1483

Kanal E, Gillen J, Evans JA, Savitz DA, Shellock FG (1993) Survey of reproductive health among female MR workers. Radiology 187:395–399

Keller TM, Rake A, Michel SCA, Seifert B, Efe G, Treiber K, Huch R, Marincek B, Kubik-Huch R (2003) Obstetric MR pelvimetry: reference values and evaluation of interand intraobserver error and intraindividual variability. Radiology 227:37–43

Liselele HB, Boulvain M, Tshibangu KC, Meuris S (2000) Maternal height and external pelvimetry to predict cephalopelvic disproportion in nulliparous African women: a cohort study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 107:947–952

Masselli G, Derchi L, McHugo J et al (2013) Acute abdominal and pelvic pain in pregnancy: ESUR recommendations. Eur Radiol 23:3485–3500

MR Pelvimetry

465

 

 

Michel SC, Rake A, Treiber K, Seifert B, Chaoui R, Huch R, Marincek M, Kubik-Huch RA (2002) MR obstetric pelvimetry: effect of birthing position on pelvic bony dimensions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1063–1067

Müttersterblichkeit WH (2004) In: Schneider H, Husslein P, Schneider KTM (eds) Die Geburtshilfe, 2nd edn. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, Verlag

O’Brien K, Rode M, Macones G (2002) Postpartum X-ray pelvimetry. Its use in calculating the fetal-pelvic index and predicting fetal-pelvic disproportion. J Reprod Med 47:845–848

Pattinson RC, Farrell E (1997) Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term. Cochrane Database Sys Rev (2):CD000161. doi:10.1002/14651858CD00161

Pfammatter T, Marincek B, von Schulthess GK, Dudenhausen JW (1990) MR pelvimetric reference values. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 153:706–710

Ray Joel G, Vermeulen Marian J et al (2016) Association between MRI exposure during pregnancy and fetal and childhood outcomes. JAMA 316:952–961

Shellock Frank G, Crues John V (2003) MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology 232:635–652

Spong CY et al (2012) Preventing the first cesarean delivery: summary of a joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Workshop. Obstet Gynecol 120:1181

Spörri S, Thoeny HC, Raio L, Lachat R, Vock P, Schneider H (2002) MR imaging pelvimetry: a useful adjunct in

the treatment of women at risk for dystocia. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:137–144

Stark DD, McCarthy SM, Filly RA, Parer JT, Hricak H, Callen PW (1985) Pelvimetry by magnetic resonance imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 144:947–950

Stewart A, Kneale GW (1968) Changes in the cancer risk associated with obstetric radiography. Lancet 1:104–107

Urhahn R, Lehnen H, Drobnitzky M, Klose KC, Gunther RW (1991) Ultrafast pelvimetry using Snapshot-­ FLASH-­MRT – a comparison with the Spinecho and FLASH techniques. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 155:432–435

van Loon AJ, Mantingh A, Thijn CJ, Mooyaart EL (1990) Pelvimetry by magnetic resonance imaging in breech presentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 163:1256–1260

Van Loon AJ, Mantingh A, Serlier EK, Kroon G, Mooyaart EL, Huisjes HJ (1997) Randomised controlled­ trial of magnetic-resonance pelvimetry in breech presentation at term. Lancet 350:1799–1804

Wentz KU, Lehmann KJ, Wischnik A et al (1994) Pelvimetry using various magnetic resonance tomography techniques vs. digital image enhancement radiography: accuracy, time requirement and energy exposure. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 54:204–212

Wright AR, English PT, Cameron HM, Wilsdon JB (1992) MR pelvimetry – a practical alternative. Acta Radiol 33:582–587

Zhang J et al (2010) The natural history of the normal stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 115:705