Skip to main content

Table 7 Impact of pelvimetry on stillbirth and perinatal outcomes

From: Reducing stillbirths: screening and monitoring during pregnancy and labour

Source Location and Type of Study Intervention Stillbirths/Perinatal Outcomes
Reviews and meta-analyses
Pattinson et al. 1997 [56] South Africa, U.S.A.
Meta-analysis (Cochrane). 4 RCTs included (N = 895 women).
Assessed the effects of pelvimetry performed antenatally, intrapartum or postpartum (intervention) vs. no pelvimetry (controls) on PMR. PMR: OR = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.18–1.42) [NS].
[5/449 vs. 10/446 in intervention vs. control groups, respectively].
Observational studies
Fine et al. 1980 [55] Retrospective study. N = 100 X-ray pelvimetry studies of cephalic presentations. Compared the Thoms method of interpretation to the modified Ball technique for x-ray pelvimetry (comparing both to manual assessment of the pelvis) as prognostic indicators for safe vaginal delivery. Uneventful nonoperative vaginal deliveries: 28.6% of patients with either inlet or midpelvic disproportion by the Thoms method, and in 22.5% of women with absolute disproportion in either plane by the modified Ball method.
Prediction of obstetric outcome: Neither technique significantly more accurate than manual assessment, or than the other.