Impact of Intrapartum Ultrasound as a Replacement for Vaginal Examination in Labor Assessment on Vaginal Delivery Complications
10.11714/jsysu.med.YX20250185
- VernacularTitle:产时超声代替阴道检查用于产程评估对阴道分娩并发症的影响
- Author:
Jinhui CUI
1
;
Xinjuan CHEN
1
;
Liping OUYANG
1
;
Ling LI
1
;
Jianhui FAN
1
;
Zeping HUANG
1
;
Ping LI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Obstetrics， The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University， Guangzhou 510630， China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
intrapartum ultrasound;
vaginal examination;
labor progress assessment;
vaginal delivery;
complications
- From:
Journal of Sun Yat-sen University(Medical Sciences)
2026;47(2):360-367
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo evaluate whether the use of intrapartum ultrasound （IPUS） to monitor the labor process， as alternative method of traditional vaginal examination （VE）， could reduce the incidence of postpartum complications associated with vaginal delivery. MethodsA total of 360 primiparas who underwent cervical dilation balloon induction of labor （IOL） and achieved successful vaginal delivery after childbirth at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between January 2022 and December 2023， were included in the retrospective study with half assessed for labor progress using IPUS （n=180） and the other half using VE （n=180）. The differences in the relevant indicators of the labor process and the complications of vaginal delivery were compared between the two groups of pregnant women. ResultsThere was no significant difference in the duration of membrane rupture， the first stage of labor and the second stage of labor between the two groups. However， the number of VE in the IPUS group was significantly lower ［nulliparous： 4 （3-4） vs. 6 （5-8）， P＜0.001； multiparous： 2 （2-3） vs. 4 （3-5）， P＜0.001］. The IPUS group experienced a lower incidence of postpartum fever compared to the VE group ［1.67%（3/180） vs. 7.22%（13/180）， P=0.006］， while other complications of vaginal delivery， such as fever during labor， postpartum hemorrhage （PPH）， laceration， poor wound healing and uroschesis， were not significantly different （all P ＞ 0.05）. The logistic regression analysis confirmed that the use of IPUS served as a protective factor for postpartum fever with an OR of 0.06 ［95% CI （0.01， 0.36）； P=0.002］， while the duration of membrane rupture was a risk factor ［OR： 1.12； 95% CI （1.03， 1.22）； P = 0.011］. ConclusionsIPUS， as an alternative to traditional VE， does not affect the progress of labor. However， it can significantly reduce the frequency of VE and the incidence of postpartum fever， thereby facilitating the rapid recovery of postpartum women， which makes it clinically valuable for application.
