UNASSIGNED: Macrosomia represents the most significant risk factor of shoulder dystocia (SD), which is a severe and emergent complication of vaginal delivery. They are both associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published influential guidelines on the diagnosis and management of fetal macrosomia and SD.
UNASSIGNED: A comparative review of guidelines from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG), and the Department for Health and Wellbeing of the Government of South Australia on macrosomia and SD was conducted.
UNASSIGNED: The ACOG and RANZCOG agree that macrosomia should be defined as birthweight above 4000-4500 g regardless of the gestational age, whereas the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence defines macrosomia as an estimated fetal weight above the 95th percentile. According to ACOG and RANZCOG, ultrasound scans and clinical estimates can be used to rule out fetal macrosomia, although lacking accuracy. Routine induction of labor before 39 weeks of gestation with the sole indication of suspected fetal macrosomia is unanimously not recommended, but an individualized counseling should be provided. Exercise, appropriate diet, and prepregnancy bariatric surgery are mentioned as preventive measures. There is also consensus among the reviewed guidelines regarding the definition and the diagnosis of SD, with the \"turtle sign\" being the most common sign for its recognition as well as the poor predictability of the reported risk factors. Moreover, there is an overall agreement on the algorithm of SD management with McRoberts technique suggested as first-line maneuver. In addition, appropriate staff training, thorough documentation, and time keeping are crucial aspects of SD management according to all medical societies. Elective delivery for the prevention of SD is discouraged by all the reviewed guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: Macrosomia is associated not only with SD but also with maternal and neonatal complications. Similarly, SD can lead to permanent neurologic sequalae, as well as perinatal death if managed in a suboptimal way. Therefore, it is crucial to develop consistent international practice protocols for their prompt diagnosis and effective management in order to safely guide clinical practice and improve pregnancy outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this document is to define labor and labor arrest and provide recommendations for the management of dystocia in the first and second stage of labor and labor arrest.
METHODS: Pregnant individuals in the first or second stage of labor.
METHODS: This guideline was developed using an a priori protocol in conjunction with a writing team consisting of one maternal-fetal medicine subspecialist appointed by the ACOG Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines-Obstetrics and two external subject matter experts. ACOG medical librarians completed a comprehensive literature search for primary literature within Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE. Studies that moved forward to the full-text screening stage were assessed by the writing team based on standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent quality assessment, and a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) evidence-to-decision framework was applied to interpret and translate the evidence into recommendation statements.
CONCLUSIONS: This Clinical Practice Guideline includes definitions of labor and labor arrest, along with recommendations for the management of dystocia in the first and second stages of labor and labor arrest. Recommendations are classified by strength and evidence quality. Ungraded Good Practice Points are included to provide guidance when a formal recommendation could not be made because of inadequate or nonexistent evidence.

This recommendation document follows the mission of the World Association of Perinatal Medicine in collaboration with the Perinatal Medicine Foundation. We aim to bring together groups and individuals throughout the world for standardization to implement the ultrasound evaluation in labor ward and improve the clinical management of labor. Ultrasound in labor can be performed using a transabdominal or a transperineal approach depending upon which parameters are being assessed. During transabdominal imaging, fetal anatomy, presentation, liquor volume, and placental localization can be determined. The transperineal images depict images of the fetal head in which calculations to determine a proposed fetal head station can be made.

UNASSIGNED: In 2014, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology published guidelines for diagnosing failed induction of labor (FIOL) and arrest of dilation (AOD) to prevent cesarean delivery (CD). The objectives of this study were to determine the rate of adherence to these guidelines and to compare the association of guideline adherence with physician CD rates and obstetric/neonatal outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Retrospective cohort review of singleton primary cesarean deliveries for FIOL and AOD at a single academic institution from 2014 to 2016. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare adherence to the guidelines with physician CD rates and obstetric/neonatal outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Of the 591 cesarean deliveries in the study, 263 were for failed induction, 328 for AOD and 79% (468/591) were not adherent to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (ACOG/SMFM) guidelines. Of the failed inductions, 82% (215/263) and of the AODs 77% (253/328) were not adherent. There was no difference between adherent and non-adherent CDs with regard to maternal characteristics, or obstetric/neonatal outcomes. Duration of oxytocin use after rupture of membranes, dilation at time of CD, and birth weight were statistically higher in adherent CDs. On multivariate linear regression, physician CD rates were inversely correlated with adherence to ACOG/SMFM guidelines (p<0.0001), gestational age (p=0.007), and parity (p=0.003).
UNASSIGNED: Our study shows that physician non-compliance with ACOG guidelines was high. Adherence to these guidelines was associated with lower physician CD rates, without an increase in obstetric or neonatal complications.

This study sought to describe how the implementation of recent labour guidelines may affect the cesarean delivery rate in a population in Alberta.
This retrospective study was conducted on primiparous women who were in labour with singleton term fetuses with cephalic presentation in Alberta from 2007 to 2016 (n = 181 738), and it used data from a perinatal database. Modelled cesarean delivery rates were calculated to determine the potential impact of the recent guidelines on the cesarean delivery rate by using the percentage of cesarean deliveries that occurred outside the threshold of the recent labour guidelines.
A total of 21.7% of the cesarean deliveries for dystocia occurred outside of the guidelines related to the first stage of labour arrest for spontaneous labour (n = 9282), and 45.4% occurred outside of the guidelines related to the first stage of labour arrest for induced labours (n = 11 712). A total of 69.0% of the cesarean deliveries for dystocia occurred outside of the failed induction of labour guidelines (n = 4921), and 55.4% occurred outside of the second stage labour arrest guidelines (n = 6632). Assuming that the labour arrest guidelines are effective at reducing the cesarean delivery rate 25% of the time, the cesarean delivery rate for primiparous women in labour would be reduced from 22.5% to 20.7%. Assuming a 75% adherence/effectiveness rate, the cesarean delivery rate would be reduced to 17.1%.
The recent labour guidelines have the potential to have a substantial impact on the intrapartum cesarean delivery rate in primiparous women with singleton fetuses with cephalic presentation at term if the guidelines are put into practice.

The ongoing debate about what models of cervical dilatation and fetal descent should guide clinical decision-making has sown uncertainty among obstetric practitioners. We previously argued that the adoption of recently published labor assessment guidelines promoted by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine may have been premature. Before accepting any new clinical approaches as the standard of care, their underlying hypotheses should be thoroughly tested to ensure they are at least equivalent (or, preferably, superior) to existing management paradigms. Some of the apparent urgency to subscribe to new clinical tactics has been fueled by legitimate concerns about the rise in the cesarean delivery rate over the past several decades. A major contributor to this change in practice patterns is that more cesarean deliveries are being done for diagnoses that fall under the rubric of dystocia than ever before. As a consequence, traditional labor curves-fundamental for assessing labor progress-and the practice paradigms associated with them have received intense scrutiny as a possible contributor to this delivery trend. Moreover, the recent proposal of new labor curves and accompanying management guidelines has, understandably, fed the appetite to correct a perceived problem. However, the cesarean delivery rate rose most rapidly during decades when there was no major change in traditional labor curves or in the guidelines for their interpretation. Also, during the years since the new guidelines were first published, there has been no major fall in cesarean delivery frequency. This raises the question of whether there was truly a fundamental flaw in the traditional labor management paradigms or whether their proper interpretation and use had been somehow forgotten, ignored, or corrupted. More important, existing studies have shown that application of the new guidelines often (but not always) results in a modest fall in the cesarean delivery rate, but that this change may be accompanied by significant increases in maternal and neonatal morbidity. These results strongly suggest more caution in the adoption of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists / Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine labor assessment recommendations. They are based on a hypothesis that has yet to undergo thorough evaluation of its risks and benefits.

To issue guidelines on management of labour induction and breech vaginal delivery.
Bibliographic search restricted to French and English languages using Medline database®, Cochrane Library and international guidelines of medical societies.
Breech delivery must take place in a maternity ward, in the presence of an obstetrician and gynaecologist and with the immediate availability of an anesthesiologist and a pediatrician during active second stage (Professional consensus). Term breech is not a contraindication to labour induction when the criteria for acceptance of vaginal delivery are met (Grade C). In this case, oxytocin or prostaglandins can be used (Grade C). Epidural analgesia with low concentrations of local anesthetics should be encouraged in case of vaginal delivery attempt (Professional consensus). It is recommended to use continuous monitoring of the CTG (Professional consensus). The use of second-line fetal monitoring is not recommended (Professional consensus). The administration of oxytocin is possible for labour augmentation (Professional consensus). It is better to start the expulsive efforts when the presentation is engaged as low as possible in the pelvic excavation (Professional consensus). Breech presentation is not an indication of episiotomy (Professional consensus). Due to insufficient data, it was not possible to make recommendations on specificities of preterm breech delivery.
In case of planned vaginal delivery, labour induction is possible for term breech fetuses, even with unfarable cervix. Guidelines for labour and vaginal delivery management have a low level of evidence.

There has been a recent significant evolution in suggested practices for the management of labor because of the increased national cesarean delivery rate. One of the most significant changes was promulgated by the 2014 Obstetric Care Consensus entitled, \"Safe Prevention of Primary Cesarean Delivery,\" which recommended reconsideration of the upper limits of the length of labor in the second stage as well as the first stage. We previously published a 2016 Clinical Opinion challenging the second-stage practice change. Over the past 2 years, there have been at least 5 reports as well as 2 national organization statements supporting revised management of second-stage labor. We now revisit the second-stage issue because we believe that it is important to carefully clarify the current status resulting from consensus statements as well as the evolving current status of scientific evidence. We structured this Clinical Opinion using questions in an effort to chronicle the story of how obstetric precepts on second-stage labor in use for more than 50 years were being replaced. How did we get here? What is the current evidence? What can be learned from this experience? Should American obstetrics now \"fall back\" to pre-existing obstetric precepts for the management of second-stage labor after having \"sprung forward\" an additional hour-namely, lengthening the duration of acceptable second-stage labor to 4 hours as recommended by the Obstetric Care Consensus? We believe that the data published since our 2016 Clinical Opinion buttress our original position that prolongation of the second stage beyond historical precepts is unsafe.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。