Assessment of the Interests of Mesure of Ultrasound " Angle of Progression " on the Cesarean Rate :a Randomized Comparative Prospective Study Multicenter Center Open (eng - echo)

October 11, 2021 updated by: Assistance Publique Hopitaux De Marseille

Assessment of the Interests of Mesure of Ultrasound Engagement on the Cesarean Rate :Study Eng - Echo Randomized Comparative Prospective Study Multicenter Center Open

The reduction in the rate of caesarean section is a major public health issue, it has reached 21% in 2010 Fance. Indeed complications to expect during pregnancy and childbirth increase doubles the risk of fetal morbidity, néonatal and maternal history of when césareinne. recommendations for clinical practice (RPC) to "scarred uterus" are being drafted under the auspices of the National College of obstetrics and gynecology (CNGOF) well highlighting the health problem public this represents. During 2011, 15% of the 2,700 patients who have recently given birth to the north of Marseille Hospital were carriers of a scarred uterus (internal data).The objective of the obstetrician is to ensure the welfare mother and fetus at the end of pregnancy and childbirth. To do this, the realization of a work being cesarean allows in some cases to reduce neonatal morbidity related to workflow especially in case of abnormal fetal pericardial pace that suggest fetal hypoxia. However, a significant number of caesarean section is performed by the side of caution during the second part of the work to a suspicion of non-engagement of the fetal presentation. These caesareans are indicated, rightly, before a clinical doubt about the height of the engagement of the fetal presentation in order to avoid making a difficult instrumental delivery, potentially harmful to the mother (perineal tear 3rd and 4th degree) and fetus (head injury, intracranial hemorrhage, cephalohematoma). A prospective study published in the Lancet estimated 37% error percentage attributable to the clinical examination in case of doubt on the commitment of presenatation fœtale. The CNGOF held through PRC publication what to do in case of obstetric clinical doubt about the commitment of the fetal presentation and "not recommended" no show against an instrumental extraction in this situation (RPC 2008).

Ultrasound has revolutionized pregnancy monitoring. Its routine use has in other prenatal diagnosis of fetal pathologies, it is the other reference screening tool of the most common obstetric pathology, preterm labor. Its use became widespread in the delivery room, the presence of an ultrasound machine is recommended by the decrees of perinatal care in maternity hospitals performing more than 1,500 deliveries per year. It is natural for conducting ultrasound during labor has emerged, first to help identify the variety of the presentation of the fetal head and then more recently in aid to instrumental delivery. Several studies have shown that ultrasound had a sensitivity of commitment over 90% for predicting the success of instrumental extraction and a vaginal delivery.

To our knowledge, to date, there is no study that investigated the benefit of ultrasound commitment to reduce the rate of cesarean section during labor. To answer this question, we want to show that making a commitment in case of diagnostic ultrasound of doubt about the level of engagement of the fetal head (4% of births) reduces by 30% the rate of caesarean section fully dilated.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

45

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Marseille, France, 13354
        • Assistance Publique Hopitaux de Marseille

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Singleton pregnancy normal evolution> 37 weeks gestation
  • Patient in labor with ruptured membranes, cephalic presentation, full dilatation since 2H, with doubts on clinical examination on the level of engagement of the fetal head in the maternal pelvis (0, +1, +2)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Abnormal fetal heart rate or suspected fetal acidosis on a scale pH
  • No maternal indication for vaginal delivery or instrumental delivery

    • History of perineal tearing the 4th degree
    • Crohn's disease with involvement of the anal sphincter
  • No fetal indication for instrumental delivery (suspected fetal thrombocytopenia)
  • Other than fetal cephalic presentations

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: ultrasound results given to obstetrical practionnair
Other: ultrasound results shaded to obstetrical practionnair

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Caesarean rate
Time Frame: 2 years
Demonstrate that achieving a so-called "engagement" ultrasound (mesurement of angle of progression) to reduce 30% cesarean rate in the second stage of labor in case of doubt about the level of commitment of fetal presentation. The primary endpoint is the rate of caesarean section.
2 years

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Numbers of haemorrhage
Time Frame: 2 years
2 years
perineal tears of 3 and 4th degree
Time Frame: 2 years
perineal wounds
2 years

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Apgar scoring
Time Frame: 2 years
Side effects with short term fetal complication
2 years

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Urielle DESALBRES, ASSISTANCE PUBLIQUE DE MARSEILLE

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

June 1, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 9, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 2, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 2, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

May 4, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 12, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 11, 2021

Last Verified

October 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2012-A01693-40
  • 2012-53 (Other Identifier: AP-HM)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Caesarean Rate

Clinical Trials on Ultrasound

Subscribe