fetal electrocardiography
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

169
(FIVE YEARS 2)

H-INDEX

19
(FIVE YEARS 0)

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0256115
Author(s):  
Carlijn Lempersz ◽  
Lore Noben ◽  
Sally-Ann B. Clur ◽  
Edwin van den Heuvel ◽  
Zhouzhao Zhan ◽  
...  

Introduction A fetal anomaly scan in mid-pregnancy is performed, to check for the presence of congenital anomalies, including congenital heart disease (CHD). Unfortunately, 40% of CHD is still missed. The combined use of ultrasound and electrocardiography might boost detection rates. The electrical heart axis is one of the characteristics which can be deduced from an electrocardiogram (ECG). The aim of this study was to determine reference values for the electrical heart axis in healthy fetuses around 20 weeks of gestation. Material and methods Non-invasive fetal electrocardiography was performed subsequent to the fetal anomaly scan in pregnant women carrying a healthy singleton fetus between 18 and 24 weeks of gestation. Eight adhesive electrodes were applied on the maternal abdomen including one ground and one reference electrode, yielding six channels of bipolar electrophysiological measurements. After removal of interferences, a fetal vectorcardiogram was calculated and then corrected for fetal orientation. The orientation of the electrical heart axis was determined from this normalized fetal vectorcardiogram. Descriptive statistics were used on normalized cartesian coordinates to determine the average electrical heart axis in the frontal plane. Furthermore, 90% prediction intervals (PI) for abnormality were calculated. Results Of the 328 fetal ECGs performed, 281 were included in the analysis. The average electrical heart axis in the frontal plane was determined at 122.7° (90% PI: -25.6°; 270.9°). Discussion The average electrical heart axis of healthy fetuses around mid-gestation is oriented to the right, which is, due to the unique fetal circulation, in line with muscle distribution in the fetal heart.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T. J. Nichting ◽  
M. W. E. Frenken ◽  
D. A. A. van der Woude ◽  
N. H. M. van Oostrum ◽  
C. M. de Vet ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Worldwide, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), fetal growth restriction (FGR) and preterm birth remain the leading causes of maternal and fetal pregnancy-related mortality and (long-term) morbidity. Fetal cardiac deformation changes can be the first sign of placental dysfunction, which is associated with HDP, FGR and preterm birth. In addition, preterm birth is likely associated with changes in electrical activity across the uterine muscle. Therefore, fetal cardiac function and uterine activity can be used for the early detection of these complications in pregnancy. Fetal cardiac function and uterine activity can be assessed by two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE), non-invasive fetal electrocardiography (NI-fECG), and electrohysterography (EHG). This study aims to generate reference values for 2D-STE, NI-fECG and EHG parameters during the second trimester of pregnancy and to investigate the diagnostic potential of these parameters in the early detection of HDP, FGR and preterm birth. Methods In this longitudinal prospective cohort study, eligible women will be recruited from a tertiary care hospital and a primary midwifery practice. In total, 594 initially healthy pregnant women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy will be included. Recordings of NI-fECG and EHG will be made weekly from 22 until 28 weeks of gestation and 2D-STE measurements will be performed 4-weekly at 16, 20, 24 and 28 weeks gestational age. Retrospectively, pregnancies complicated with pregnancy-related diseases will be excluded from the cohort. Reference values for 2D-STE, NI-fECG and EHG parameters will be assessed in uncomplicated pregnancies. After, 2D-STE, NI-fCG and EHG parameters measured during gestation in complicated pregnancies will be compared with these reference values. Discussion This will be the a large prospective study investigating new technologies that could potentially have a high impact on antepartum fetal monitoring. Trial registration Registered on 26 March 2020 in the Dutch Trial Register (NL8769) via https://www.trialregister.nl/trials and registered on 21 October 2020 to the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (NL73607.015.20) via https://www.toetsingonline.nl/to/ccmo_search.nsf/Searchform?OpenForm.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rik Vullings ◽  
Judith O. E. H. van Laar

Fetal monitoring is important to diagnose complications that can occur during pregnancy. If detected timely, these complications might be resolved before they lead to irreversible damage. Current fetal monitoring mainly relies on cardiotocography, the simultaneous registration of fetal heart rate and uterine activity. Unfortunately, the technology to obtain the cardiotocogram has limitations. In current clinical practice the fetal heart rate is obtained via either an invasive scalp electrode, that poses risks and can only be applied during labor and after rupture of the fetal membranes, or via non-invasive Doppler ultrasound technology that is inaccurate and suffers from loss of signal, in particular in women with high body mass, during motion, or in preterm pregnancies. In this study, transabdominal electrophysiological measurements are exploited to provide fetal heart rate non-invasively and in a more reliable manner than Doppler ultrasound. The performance of the fetal heart rate detection is determined by comparing the fetal heart rate to that obtained with an invasive scalp electrode during intrapartum monitoring. The performance is gauged by comparing it to performances mentioned in literature on Doppler ultrasound and on two commercially-available devices that are also based on transabdominal fetal electrocardiography.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0242983
Author(s):  
Kajal K. Tamber ◽  
Dexter J. L. Hayes ◽  
Stephen J. Carey ◽  
Jayawan H. B. Wijekoon ◽  
Alexander E. P. Heazell

Background Antepartum fetal monitoring aims to assess fetal development and wellbeing throughout pregnancy. Current methods utilised in clinical practice are intermittent and only provide a ‘snapshot’ of fetal wellbeing, thus key signs of fetal demise could be missed. Continuous fetal monitoring (CFM) offers the potential to alleviate these issues by providing an objective and longitudinal overview of fetal status. Various CFM devices exist within literature; this review planned to provide a systematic overview of these devices, and specifically aimed to map the devices’ design, performance and factors which affect this, whilst determining any gaps in development. Methods A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, EMCARE, BNI, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Pubmed databases. Following the deletion of duplicates, the articles’ titles and abstracts were screened and suitable papers underwent a full-text assessment prior to inclusion in the review by two independent assessors. Results The literature searches generated 4,885 hits from which 43 studies were included in the review. Twenty-four different devices were identified utilising four suitable CFM technologies: fetal electrocardiography, fetal phonocardiography, accelerometry and fetal vectorcardiography. The devices adopted various designs and signal processing methods. There was no common means of device performance assessment between different devices, which limited comparison. The device performance of fetal electrocardiography was reduced between 28 to 36 weeks’ gestation and during high levels of maternal movement, and increased during night-time rest. Other factors, including maternal body mass index, fetal position, recording location, uterine activity, amniotic fluid index, number of fetuses and smoking status, as well as factors which affected alternative technologies had equivocal effects and require further investigation. Conclusions A variety of CFM devices have been developed, however no specific approach or design appears to be advantageous due to high levels of inter-device and intra-device variability.


Author(s):  
Laura Burattini ◽  
Ilaria Marcantoni ◽  
Amnah Nasim ◽  
Luca Burattini ◽  
Micaela Morettini ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Joachim ◽  
Vyacheslav Shulgin ◽  
Oleh Viunytskyi ◽  
Oleksii Ostras ◽  
Igor Lakhno

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document