Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Dec 21;2015(12):CD000116.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000116.pub5.

Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour

James P Neilson  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour

James P Neilson. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Hypoxaemia during labour can alter the shape of the fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) waveform, notably the relation of the PR to RR intervals, and elevation or depression of the ST segment. Technical systems have therefore been developed to monitor the fetal ECG during labour as an adjunct to continuous electronic fetal heart rate monitoring with the aim of improving fetal outcome and minimising unnecessary obstetric interference.

Objectives: To compare the effects of analysis of fetal ECG waveforms during labour with alternative methods of fetal monitoring.

Search methods: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (latest search 23 September 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

Selection criteria: Randomised trials comparing fetal ECG waveform analysis with alternative methods of fetal monitoring during labour.

Data collection and analysis: One review author independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. One review author assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

Main results: Seven trials (27,403 women) were included: six trials of ST waveform analysis (26,446 women) and one trial of PR interval analysis (957 women). The trials were generally at low risk of bias for most domains and the quality of evidence for ST waveform analysis trials was graded moderate to high. In comparison to continuous electronic fetal heart rate monitoring alone, the use of adjunctive ST waveform analysis made no obvious difference to primary outcomes: births by caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.08; six trials, 26,446 women; high quality evidence); the number of babies with severe metabolic acidosis at birth (cord arterial pH less than 7.05 and base deficit greater than 12 mmol/L) (average RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.20; six trials, 25,682 babies; moderate quality evidence); or babies with neonatal encephalopathy (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.22; six trials, 26,410 babies; high quality evidence). There were, however, on average fewer fetal scalp samples taken during labour (average RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; four trials, 9671 babies; high quality evidence) although the findings were heterogeneous and there were no data from the largest trial (from the USA). There were marginally fewer operative vaginal births (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.99; six trials, 26,446 women); but no obvious difference in the number of babies with low Apgar scores at five minutes or babies requiring neonatal intubation, or babies requiring admission to the special care unit (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.04, six trials, 26,410 babies; high quality evidence). There was little evidence that monitoring by PR interval analysis conveyed any benefit of any sort.

Authors' conclusions: The modest benefits of fewer fetal scalp samplings during labour (in settings in which this procedure is performed) and fewer instrumental vaginal births have to be considered against the disadvantages of needing to use an internal scalp electrode, after membrane rupture, for ECG waveform recordings. We found little strong evidence that ST waveform analysis had an effect on the primary outcome measures in this systematic review.There was a lack of evidence showing that PR interval analysis improved any outcomes; and a larger future trial may possibly demonstrate beneficial effects.There is little information about the value of fetal ECG waveform monitoring in preterm fetuses in labour. Information about long-term development of the babies included in the trials would be valuable.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1
1
'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
2
2
'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 1 Caesarean section.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 2 Cord pH < 7.05 + base deficit > 12 mmol/L.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 3 Neonatal encephalopathy.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 4 Fetal blood sampling.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 5 Operative vaginal delivery.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 6 Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes.
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 7 Neonatal intubation.
1.8
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 8 Admission neonatal special care unit.
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 Fetal ECG plus CTG versus CTG alone, Outcome 9 Perinatal death.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Amer‐Wahlin 2001 {published data only}
    1. Amer‐Wahlin I, Hellsten C, Noren H, Hagberg H, Herbst A, Kjellmer I, et al. Cardiotocography only versus cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram for intrapartum fetal monitoring: a Swedish randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2001;358:534‐8. - PubMed
    1. Amer‐Wahlin I, Kallen K, Herbst A, Rydhstroem H, Sundstrom AK, Marsal K. Implementation of new medical techniques: experience from the Swedish randomized controlled trial on fetal ecg during labor. Journal of Maternal‐Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2005;18(2):93‐100. - PubMed
    1. Amer‐Wahlin I, Kjellmer I, Marsal K, Olofsson P, Rosen KG. Swedish randomized controlled trial of cardiotocography versus cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram revisited: analysis of data according to standard versus modified intention‐to‐treat principle. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2011;90(9):990‐6. - PubMed
    1. Amer‐Wahlin I, Marsal K, Noren H, Hellsten C. Randomized controlled trial of CTG versus CTG + ST analysis of the fetal ECG. XVI FIGO World Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Book 3); 2000 Sept 3‐8; Washington DC, USA. 2000:35.
    1. Hagberg H, Amer‐Wahlin I, Hellsten C, Noren H, Herbst A, Lilja H, et al. Intrapartum fetal monitoring: cardiotocography versus cardiotocography plus fetal ECG ST waveform analysis. A Swedish randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001;184(1):S19.
Belfort 2015 {published data only}
    1. Belfort MA, Saade GR, Thom E, Blackwell SC, Reddy UM, Thorp JM, et al. for the Eunice Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal‐Fetal Medicine Units Network. A randomized trial of intrapartum fetal ECG ST‐segment analysis. New England Journal of Medicine 2015;373:632‐41. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saade G, for Eunice Shriver NICHD Network. Fetal ECG analysis of the ST segment as an adjunct to intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: a randomized clinical trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2015;212(1 Suppl 1):S2.
Ojala 2006 {published data only}
    1. Ojala K, Vääräsmäki M, Mäkikallio K, Valkama M, Tekay A. A comparison of intrapartum automated fetal electrocardiography and conventional cardiotocography—a randomised controlled study. BJOG: an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2006;113:419‐23. - PubMed
Strachan 2000 {published data only}
    1. Strachan BK, Wijngaarden WJ, Sahota D, Chang A, James DK, for the FECG Study Group. Cardiotocography only versus cardiotocography plus PR‐interval analysis in intrapartum surveillance: a randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet 2000;355:456‐9. - PubMed
    1. Wijngaarden WJ, Sahota DS, James DK, Farrell T, Mires GJ, Wilcox M, et al. Improved intrapartum surveillance with PR interval analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram: a randomised trial showing a reduction in fetal blood sampling. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996;174:1295‐9. - PubMed
    1. Wijngaarden WJ, Sahota DS, James DK, Symonds EM, Farrell T, Mires G. Does the fetal ECG improve intrapartum surveillance? II: A prospective evaluation. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 1994;46(Suppl 2):102.
Vayssiere 2007 {published data only}
    1. Vayssiere C, David E, Haberstich R, Sebahoun V, Roth E, Meyer N, et al. A French randomized controlled trial on ST analysis in a population with abnormal FHR in labor. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2006;195(6 Suppl 1):S222. - PubMed
    1. Vayssiere C, David E, Meyer N, Haberstich R, Sebahoun V, Roth E, et al. A French randomized controlled trial of ST‐segment analysis in a population with abnormal cardiotocograms during labor. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2007;197(3):299.e1‐e6. - PubMed
Westerhuis 2010 {published data only}
    1. Becker J, Westerhuis M, Sterrenburg K, Kwee A, Visser G. Fetal blood sampling in the Dutch STAN‐trial: reason to adjust the clinical guidelines?. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009;201(6 Suppl 1):S240.
    1. Becker JH, Westerhuis ME, Sterrenburg K, Akker ES, Beek E, Bolte AC, et al. Fetal blood sampling in addition to intrapartum ST‐analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram: evaluation of the recommendations in the Dutch STAN(R) trial. BJOG: an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2011;118(10):1239‐46. - PubMed
    1. Kwee A. Cardiotocography plus ST‐analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram versus cardiotocography only for intrapartum monitoring: a Dutch randomized trial. Journal of Perinatal Medicine 2009;37(Suppl 1):66.
    1. Kwee A, Visser GHA. The cost‐effectiveness of ST‐analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram as compared to fetal blood sampling for intrapartum monitoring: a randomised controlled trial. Netherlands Trial Register (http://www.trialregister.nl) (accessed 1 November 2005).
    1. Vijgen SMC, Westerhuis MEMH, Opmeer BC, Visser GHA, Moons KGM, Porath MM, et al. Cost‐effectiveness of cardiotocography plus ST analysis of the fetal electrocardiogram compared with cardiotocography alone. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2011;90(7):772‐8. - PubMed
Westgate 1993 {published data only}
    1. Westgate J, Harris M, Curnow J, Greene K. Plymouth randomised controlled trial of 2400 cases ‐ ST waveform plus CTG vs CTG alone for intrapartum monitoring. Proceedings of 26th British Congress of Obstetrics and Gynaecology; 1992; Manchester, UK. 1992:177.
    1. Westgate J, Harris M, Curnow JSH, Green KR. Randomized trial of cardiotocography alone or with ST waveform analysis for intrapartum monitoring. Lancet 1992;340:194‐8. - PubMed
    1. Westgate J, Harris M, Curnow JSH, Greene KR. Plymouth randomized trial of CTG vs ST waveform analysis plus CTG for intrapartum monitoring: 2400 cases. Journal of Perinatal Medicine 1992;20(1):268.
    1. Westgate J, Harris M, Curnow JSH, Greene KR. Plymouth randomized trial of cardiotocogram only vs ST waveform plus cardiotocogram for intrapartum monitoring in 2400 cases. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1993;169:1151‐60. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Hruban 2006 {published data only}
    1. Hruban L, Janku P, Zahradnickova J, Kurecova B, Roztocil A, Kachlík P, et al. Role of ST‐analysis of fetal ECG in intrapartal fetus monitoring with presumed growth retardation. Ceska Gynekologie 2006;71(4):268‐72. - PubMed
Ignatov 2012 {published data only}
    1. Ignatov P, Atanasov B. [Indirect standard cardiotocography plus fetal blood sampling versus indirect quantitative cardiotocography‐‐a randomized comparative study in intrapartum monitoring]. [Bulgarian]. Akusherstvo i Ginekologiia 2012;51(5):3‐10. - PubMed
Janku 2006 {published data only}
    1. Janku P, Hruban L, Kurecova B, Roztocil A, Kachlik P, Zahradnickova J. ST analysis of fetal ECG in premature deliveries during 30th‐36th week of pregnancy. Ceska Gynekologie 2006;71(3):163‐8. - PubMed
Olofsson 2003 {published data only}
    1. Olofsson P. Current status of intrapartum fetal monitoring: cardiotocography versus cardiotocography + ST analysis of the fetal ECG. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2003;110:S113‐S118. - PubMed
Prieto 2008 {published data only}
    1. Prieto AP, Pareja MV, Zuniga IV, Romero TA, Leon MDR, Ventoso FM. Pulse oximetry compared with fetal electrocardiogram to control intrapartum fetal wellbeing. Journal of Maternal‐Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 2008;21(Suppl 1):141.

References to studies awaiting assessment

Gongora 2014 {published data only}
    1. Gongora RJ, Naveiro SM, Ruiz DS, Puertas PA, Barranco AM, Carrillo BMP. A comparison of intrapartum fetal electrocardiography versus conventional cardiotocography in prolonged gestations: preliminary results. Journal of Maternal‐Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2014;27(Suppl 1):265.

References to ongoing studies

Bach 2012 {published data only}
    1. Bach D, Secher NJ. Cardiotocography combined with ST‐analysis versus cardiotocography combined with scalp‐pH in deliveries with abnormal CTG ‐ a randomised trial. ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov/) [accessed 3 August 2014] 2012. - PubMed
Spong 2013 {published data only}
    1. Spong C. Fetal ST segment and T wave analysis in labor (STAN). ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov/) 2010.

Additional references

Alfirevic 2013
    1. Alfirevic Z, Devane D, Gyte GML. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006066] - DOI - PubMed
Amer‐Wahlin 2011
    1. Amer‐Wahlin I, Kjellmer I, Marsal K, Olofsson P, Rosen KG. Swedish randomized controlled trial of cardiotocography only versus cardiotocography plus ST analysis of fetal electrocardiogram revisited: Analysis of data according to standard versus modified intention‐to‐treat principle. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2011;90(9):990‐6. - PubMed
Dawes 1994
    1. Dawes G, Meir YJ, Mandruzzato GP. Computerized evaluation of fetal heart rate patterns. Journal of Perinatal Medicine 1994;22:491‐9. - PubMed
Elbourne 2002
    1. Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Higgins JPT, Curtin F, Vaillancourt JM. Meta‐analyses involving cross‐over trials: methodological issues. International Journal of Epidemiology 2002;31:140‐9. - PubMed
Greene 1987
    1. Greene KG. The ECG waveform. In: Whittle M editor(s). Bailliere's Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Vol. 1, London: Bailliere Tindall, 1987:131‐55. - PubMed
Greene 1999
    1. Greene K. Intrapartum fetal monitoring: CTG, ECG and fetal blood sampling. In: Rodeck CH, Whittle MJ editor(s). Fetal Medicine: Basic Science and Clinical Practice. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1999:985‐1004.
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Marsal 2011
    1. Marsal K. Cardiotocography and ST analysis for intrapartum fetal monitoring ‐ author's reply. Lancet 2011;378(9797):1138. - PubMed
Olofsson 2014
    1. Olofsson P, Ayres‐de‐Campos D, Kessler J, Tendal B, Yli BM, Devoe L. A critical appraisal of the evidence for using cardiotocography plus ECG ST waveform analysis for fetal surveillance in labor. Part II: the meta‐analyses. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2014;93:571‐86. - PMC - PubMed
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Rosen 1989
    1. Rosen KG, Lindecrantz K. STAN ‐ the Gothenburg model for fetal surveillance during labour by ST analysis of the fetal ECG. Clinical Physics and Physiological Measurement 1989;10(Suppl B):51‐6. - PubMed
Rosen 1991
    1. Rosen KG, Arulkumaran S, Greene KR, Lilja H, Lindecrantz K, Seneviratne H, et al. Clinical validity of fetal ECG waveform analysis. In: Saling E editor(s). Perinatology. Nutrition Workshop Series. Vol. 26, New York: Raven Press, 1991:95‐110.
Schuit 2013
    1. Schuit E, Amer‐Wahlin I, Ojala K, Vayssiere C, Westerhuis MEMH, Marsal K, et al. Effectiveness of electronic fetal monitoring with additional ST analysis in vertex singleton pregnancies beyond 36 weeks of gestation: an individual participant data meta‐analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2013;208:187.e1‐13. - PubMed
Swedish Research Council 2010
    1. Swedish Research Council. Opinion provided on request for investigation of suspected misconduct in research ‐ the STAN study. Log no 312‐2008‐7602.

References to other published versions of this review

Neilson 1995
    1. Neilson JP. Intrapartum fetal ECG plus heart rate recording. [revised 12 May 1994]. In: Enkin MW, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew MJ, Neilson JP, Crowther C (eds) Pregnancy and Childbirth Database [database on disk and CDROM]. The Cochrane Collaboration; Issue 2, Oxford: Update Software; 1995.
Neilson 2003
    1. Neilson JP Reviews. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000116] - DOI - PubMed
Neilson 2006
    1. Neilson JP. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000116.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Neilson 2012
    1. Neilson JP. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000116.pub3] - DOI - PubMed
Neilson 2013
    1. Neilson JP. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000116.pub4] - DOI - PubMed