Alan Fishman

Vaginal delivery of the nonvertex second twin

OBJECTIVE The purpose of our study was to test the hypothesis that there is no increased morbidity or mortality associated with vaginal delivery of the nonvertex second twin. STUDY DESIGN The medical records of 781 consecutive twin gestations achieving a gestational age > or = 20 weeks and delivering between Jan. 1, 1985, and Dec. 31, 1988, were reviewed. All live-born, vaginally delivered second twins were identified, grouped by presentation, and compared with respect to 5-minute Apgar scores, length of neonatal hospital stay, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, and neonatal deaths. RESULTS Of the 390 live-born, vaginally delivered second twins, 207 were delivered as vertex and 183 were delivered as breech. Ninety-five percent of the breech deliveries were total breech extractions. There were no statistically significant differences between the vaginal breech and vaginal vertex deliveries in any of the neonatal outcome measures studied even when stratified by birth weight. CONCLUSIONS These results support the null hypothesis and suggest that vaginal delivery of the nonvertex second twin is a safe intrapartum management option, although no conclusion can be reached in infants weighing < 1500 gm. We found no evidence of excessive morbidity or mortality associated with total breech extraction of the second twin.

Obstetrician/gynecologist hospitalists: can we improve safety and outcomes for patients and hospitals and improve lifestyle for physicians?

Over the last 5 years, a new obstetric-gynecologic hospitalist model has emerged rapidly, the primary focus of which is the care and safety of the laboring patient. The need for this type of practitioner has been driven by a number of factors: various types of patient safety programs that require a champion and organizer; the realization that bad outcomes and malpractice lawsuits often result from the lack of immediate availability of a physician in the labor and delivery suite; the desire for many younger practicing physicians to seek a balance between their personal and professional lives; the appeal of shift work as opposed to running a busy private practice; the waning amount of training that new residency graduates receive in critical skills that are needed on labor and delivery; the void in critical care of the laboring patient that is created by the outpatient focus of many physicians in maternal-fetal medicine; the need for hospitals to have a group of physicians to implement protocols and policies on the unit, and the need for teaching in all hospitals, not just academic centers. By having a dedicated group of physicians whose practice is limited mostly to the care of the labor and delivery aspects of patient care, there is great potential to address many of these needs. There are currently 164 known obstetrician/gynecologist hospitalist programs across the United States, with 2 more coming on each month; the newly formed Society of Obstetrician/Gynecologist Hospitalists currently has >80 individual members. This article addresses the advantages, challenges, and variety of Hospitalist models and will suggest that what may be considered an emerging trend is actually a sustainable model for improved patient care and safety.

How frequently should the amniotic fluid index be performed during the course of antepartum testing

OBJECTIVE Our purpose was to evaluate the need for frequent amniotic fluid volume assessments in our antepartum testing unit. STUDY DESIGN In a retrospective analysis of data accumulated over 1 year in our antepartum testing unit amniotic fluid index values performed at 3- to 4-day intervals were compared with follow-up values. Of 11,827 amniotic fluid index values, there were 6291 with follow-up values within 4 days. The results were stratified on the basis of the subsequent amniotic fluid index value and estimated gestational age. Comparisons were made relating to amniotic fluid index testing intervals of 4 versus 7 days. RESULTS Patients with an amniotic fluid index > 8 cm had a 2.3% chance (128/5677) of having oligohydramnios (amniotic fluid index < or = 5.0 cm) in the next 4 days. Those patients with low-normal amniotic fluid index values (5 to 8 cm) had a 16.2% chance (96/593) of having oligohydramnios in the next 4 days. There were few patients with an amniotic fluid index < or = 5 cm who had subsequent amniotic fluid index values measured. Patients with an amniotic fluid index > 8 cm had a 2.2% chance (156/6946) of having oligohydramnios within 7 days, and those with low-normal amniotic fluid index values had a 16.3% chance (105/643) of having oligohydramnios with 7 days. Stratifying the results by gestational age reveals that patients at > or = 41 weeks of gestation had a 23.3% chance of having oligohydramnios within 4 days if the current amniotic fluid index was found to be 5 to 8 cm and a 7.4% chance if the current amniotic fluid index was found to be normal. Term (estimated gestational age of 37 to 40 weeks) patients had a similar risk of oligohydramnios in 4 days if the amniotic fluid index was low-normal (17.8%) but a risk of 3.6% if the amniotic fluid index was normal. CONCLUSIONS For patients at < 41 weeks of gestation undergoing antepartum testing, weekly assessments of amniotic fluid index is probably adequate if the initial measurement is in the normal range (> or = 8 cm) because the risk of having oligohydramnios within 7 days is low (2.2%). For patients at < 41 weeks of gestation whose initial amniotic fluid index measurement is in the low-normal range (5 to 8 cm), a scheme of twice-weekly assessment is justified on the basis of a higher risk for an amniotic fluid index < or = 5 cm within 4 days (12.3%). For all patients at > or = 41 weeks of gestation, twice-weekly amniotic fluid index assessments are recommended regardless of the initial measurement.

Prospective evaluation of a protocol for using transabdominal ultrasound to screen for short cervix

OBJECTIVE We sought to evaluate a recently proposed protocol whereby transabdominal ultrasound of the cervix might be used as a prescreen to select women to undergo or to forgo measurement of cervical length via transvaginal ultrasound (CLvag). STUDY DESIGN This was a prospective cohort study. Measurements of cervical length via transabdominal ultrasound (CLabd) and CLvag were made in women with singleton pregnancy during routine obstetrical ultrasound examination at 18(0/7) to 23(6/7) weeks of gestation. The transabdominal screen was considered positive if CLabd was ≤36 mm with the maternal bladder full or ≤35 mm with the bladder empty, or adequate imaging of the cervix could not be obtained. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios of a positive screen to detect a short cervix (CLvag ≤25 mm) were calculated. RESULTS An interim analysis identified several technical problems with CLabd measurements, so the protocol was extensively revised. Under the revised protocol, 1580 women were included. Adequate views of the cervix were obtained via transabdominal imaging in 46% of subjects with the bladder empty and 56% with the bladder full. The correlation between CLabd and CLvag was poor (r = 0.38). Of the 17 patients with a short cervix, 15 had suboptimal transabdominal exams (screen positive) and 2 had CLabd ≤35 mm with bladder empty (screen positive). Sensitivity of the screen was 100% (95% confidence interval, 80.5-100%) but specificity was only 32.2% (95% confidence interval, 29.9-34.6%) and screen positive rate was 66.3%. Several technical problems and limitations of transabdominal imaging of the cervix are shown. CONCLUSION Using modern, high-resolution ultrasound equipment, we were unable to adequately image the cervix via transabdominal ultrasound in half the cases. Although we confirmed that a CLabd cutoff value of 35-36 mm is appropriate for detection of short cervix, the technique for measuring CLabd is fraught with technical problems. Practitioners must validate the technique in their own practice before adopting this or similar prescreening protocols. We decided not to adopt this protocol.

A proposal to reduce the risk of transmission of human papilloma virus via transvaginal ultrasound.

Three steps must be followed to prevent the transmission of infection via a contaminated transvaginal ultrasound probe: cleaning the probe after every use, high-level disinfection, and covering the probe with a single-use barrier during the examination. There may be critical flaws in at least 2 of these steps as they are currently practiced. First, 2 widely used disinfectants, glutaraldehyde and orthophthalaldehyde, have recently been found to be ineffective at neutralizing human papilloma virus type 16 and type 18. Second, commercial ultrasound probe covers have an unacceptable rate of leakage (8-81%) compared to condoms (0.9-2%). We recommend the use of a sonicated hydrogen peroxide disinfectant system rather than aldehyde-type disinfectants. We recommend that the probe be covered with a condom rather than a commercial probe cover during transvaginal ultrasound examination. Combined with probe cleaning, these 2 steps are estimated to result in an 800 million- to 250 billion-fold reduction in human papilloma virus viral load, which should translate to greatly enhanced patient safety.