Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 5(112), p. 1143-1151, 2008

DOI: 10.1097/aog.0b013e31818b4ade

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Obstetric Anesthesia Digest, 4(29), p. 210, 2009

DOI: 10.1097/01.aoa.0000362097.33827.fc

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

External Cephalic Version–Related Risks

This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on external cephalic version–related complications and to assess if the outcome of a version attempt is related to complications. DATA SOURCES: In March 2007 we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting on complications from an external cephalic version attempt for singleton breech pregnancies after 36 weeks of pregnancy were selected. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) from studies that reported both on complications as well as on the position of the fetus immediately after the procedure. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We found 84 studies, reporting on 12,955 version attempts that reported on external cephalic version–related complications. The pooled complication rate was 6.1% (95% CI 4.7–7.8), 0.24% for serious complications (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17–0.34) and 0.35% for emergency cesarean deliveries (95% CI 0.26–0.47). Complications were not related to external cephalic version outcome (OR 1.2 (95% CI 0.93–1.7). CONCLUSION: External cephalic version is a safe procedure. Complications are not related to the fetal position after external cephalic version. ; Kim Grootscholten, Marjolein Kok, S. Guid Oei, Ben W. J. Mol and Joris A. van der Post