Management of shoulder dystocia - Trends in incidence and maternal and neonatal morbidity

Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.37). 12/2007; 110(5):1059-68. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000287615.35425.5c
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To investigate trends in the incidence of shoulder dystocia, methods used to overcome the obstruction, and rates of maternal and neonatal morbidity.
Cases of shoulder dystocia and of neonatal brachial plexus injury occurring from 1991 to 2005 in our unit were identified. The obstetric notes of cases were examined, and the management of the shoulder dystocia was recorded. Demographic data, labor management with outcome, and neonatal outcome were also recorded for all vaginal deliveries over the same period. Incidence rates of shoulder dystocia and associated morbidity related to the methods used for overcoming the obstruction to labor were determined.
There were 514 cases of shoulder dystocia among 79,781 (0.6%) vaginal deliveries with 44 cases of neonatal brachial plexus injury and 36 asphyxiated neonates; two neonates with cerebral palsy died. The McRoberts' maneuver was used increasingly to overcome the obstruction, from 3% during the first 5 years to 91% during the last 5 years. The incidence of shoulder dystocia, brachial plexus injury, and neonatal asphyxia all increased over the study period without change in maternal morbidity frequency.
The explanation for the increase in shoulder dystocia is unclear but the introduction of the McRoberts' maneuver has not improved outcomes compared with the earlier results.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Macrosomic fetuses are at increased risk of shoulder dystocia. We aimed to compare induction of labour with expectant management for large-for-date fetuses for prevention of shoulder dystocia and other neonatal and maternal morbidity associated with macrosomia. We did this pragmatic, randomised controlled trial between Oct 1, 2002, and Jan 1, 2009, in 19 tertiary-care centres in France, Switzerland, and Belgium. Women with singleton fetuses whose estimated weight exceeded the 95th percentile, were randomly assigned (1:1), via computer-generated permuted-block randomisation (block size of four to eight) to receive induction of labour within 3 days between 37(+0) weeks and 38(+6) weeks of gestation, or expectant management. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Participants and caregivers were not masked to group assignment. Our primary outcome was a composite of clinically significant shoulder dystocia, fracture of the clavicle, brachial plexus injury, intracranial haemorrhage, or death. We did analyses by intention to treat. This trial is registered with, number NCT00190320. We randomly assigned 409 women to the induction group and 413 women to the expectant management group, of whom 407 women and 411 women, respectively, were included in the final analysis. Mean birthweight was 3831 g (SD 324) in the induction group and 4118 g (392) in the expectant group. Induction of labour significantly reduced the risk of shoulder dystocia or associated morbidity (n=8) compared with expectant management (n=25; relative risk [RR] 0·32, 95% CI 0·15-0·71; p=0·004). We recorded no brachial plexus injuries, intracranial haemorrhages, or perinatal deaths. The likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery was higher in women in the induction group than in those in the expectant management group (RR 1·14, 95% CI 1·01-1·29). Caesarean delivery and neonatal morbidity did not differ significantly between the groups. Induction of labour for suspected large-for-date fetuses is associated with a reduced risk of shoulder dystocia and associated morbidity compared with expectant management. Induction of labour does not increase the risk of caesarean delivery and improves the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery. These benefits should be balanced with the effects of early-term induction of labour. Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris and the University of Geneva. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    The Lancet 04/2015; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61904-8 · 39.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The first part of the study involved data collection for the detection of geographic variations and chronologic fluctuations in the rates of shoulder dystocia. The second part of the research evaluated head-to-body delivery times in cases of arrest of the shoulders at birth that had resulted in fetal damage during the last four decades in the USA.
    Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 09/2014; 291(4). DOI:10.1007/s00404-014-3453-8 · 1.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Though subjective in nature, both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practice bulletin and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists green guideline are in agreement on the descriptor of shoulder dystocia: requirement of additional obstetric maneuvers when gentle downward traction has failed to affect the delivery of the shoulders. The rate of shoulder dystocia is about 1.4% of all deliveries and 0.7% for vaginal births. Compared to non-diabetics (0.6%), among diabetics, the rate of impacted shoulders is 201% higher (1.9%); newborns delivered by vacuum or forceps have 254% higher likelihood of shoulder dystocia than those born spontaneously (2.0% vs. 0.6%, respectively). When the birthweight is categorized as <4000, 4000-4449, and >4500g, the likelihood of shoulder dystocia in the US vs. other countries varies significantly. Future studies should focus on lowering the rate of shoulder dystocia and its associated morbidities, without concomitantly increasing the rate of cesarean delivery.
    Seminars in Perinatology 06/2014; 38(4):184-8. DOI:10.1053/j.semperi.2014.04.002 · 2.42 Impact Factor