Search

OBJECTIVE. To determine whether fetal weight estimated by ultrasound on the day the external cephalic version (ECV) is related to the procedure's success rate. DESIGN. Retrospective cohort study. Setting. University hospital. POPULATION OR SAMPLE. Two hundred women with a singleton pregnancy undergoing an ECV attempt between March 2002 and March 2006. METHOD. Projected birthweight at delivery was calculated. Logistic regression analysis, by grams and by weight intervals, and multiple correspondence analysis were performed to determine whether or not the weight was related to the procedure's success. Specific statistical analysis was undertaken to minimize measurement bias in fetal weight estimation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE. Success of ECV in relation to estimated fetal weight. RESULTS. Measurement bias was ruled out because no statistically significant differences were identified with the Student's t-test (p0.05), Bland-Altman's agreement analysis, and the interclass correlation coefficient analysis (ICC = 0.829; CI95% 0.772-0.871; p0.01). By logistic regression analysis, a variable relation between fetal weight estimated by ultrasound and ECV success was detected, while multiple correspondence analysis suggested that variations in fetal weight are weakly related to the procedure's success or failure. No relation was identified between ECV and birthweight (p = 0.38) when the delivery took place in the same week as the version. CONCLUSIONS. Estimated fetal weight before ECV seems not to be related to the outcome of ECV.

INTRODUCTION Our objective was to compare the effect of two pain relief methods (remifentanil vs. nitrous oxide) on the success rate of external cephalic version. MATERIAL AND METHODS We conducted a randomized open label parallel-group controlled single-center clinical trial with sequential design, at Cruces University Hospital, Spain. Singleton pregnancies in noncephalic presentation at term that were referred for external cephalic version were assigned according to a balanced (1:1) restricted randomization scheme to analgesic treatment with remifentanil or nitrous oxide during the procedure. The primary endpoint was external cephalic version success rate. Secondary endpoints were adverse event rate, degree of pain, cesarean rate and perinatal outcomes. RESULTS The trial was stopped early after the second interim analysis due to a very low likelihood of finding substantial differences in efficacy (futility). The external cephalic version success rate was the same in the two arms (31/60, 51.7%) with 120 women recruited, 60 in each arm. The mean pain score was significantly lower in the remifentanil group (3.2 ± 2.4 vs. 6.0 ± 2.3; p < 0.01). No differences were found in external cephalic version-related complications. There was a trend toward a higher frequency of adverse effects in the remifentanil group (18.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.10), with a significantly higher incidence rate (21.7 events/100 women vs. 6.7 events/100 women with nitrous oxide, p = 0.03). All reported adverse events were mild and reversible. CONCLUSIONS Remifentanil for analgesia decreased external cephalic version-related pain but did not increase the success rate of external cephalic version at term and appeared to be associated with an increased frequency of mild adverse effects.