Table 7

Impact of pelvimetry on stillbirth and perinatal outcomes

Source

Location and Type of Study

Intervention

Stillbirths/Perinatal Outcomes


Reviews and meta-analyses


Pattinson et al. 1997 [56]

South Africa, U.S.A.

Meta-analysis (Cochrane). 4 RCTs included (N = 895 women).

Assessed the effects of pelvimetry performed antenatally, intrapartum or postpartum (intervention) vs. no pelvimetry (controls) on PMR.

PMR: OR = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.18–1.42) [NS].

[5/449 vs. 10/446 in intervention vs. control groups, respectively].


Observational studies


Fine et al. 1980 [55]

Retrospective study. N = 100 X-ray pelvimetry studies of cephalic presentations.

Compared the Thoms method of interpretation to the modified Ball technique for x-ray pelvimetry (comparing both to manual assessment of the pelvis) as prognostic indicators for safe vaginal delivery.

Uneventful nonoperative vaginal deliveries: 28.6% of patients with either inlet or midpelvic disproportion by the Thoms method, and in 22.5% of women with absolute disproportion in either plane by the modified Ball method.

Prediction of obstetric outcome: Neither technique significantly more accurate than manual assessment, or than the other.


Haws et al. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2009 9(Suppl 1):S5   doi:10.1186/1471-2393-9-S1-S5

Open Data