• Per Olofsson, Diogo Ayres-de-Campos, Jörg Kessler, Britta Tendal, Branka M Yli, and Lawrence Devoe.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institution of Clinical Sciences, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
• Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014 Jun 1; 93 (6): 556-68; discussion 568-9.

AbstractWe reappraised the five randomized controlled trials that compared cardiotocography plus ECG ST interval analysis (CTG+ST) vs. cardiotocography. The numbers enrolled ranged from 5681 (Dutch randomized controlled trial) to 799 (French randomized controlled trial). The Swedish randomized controlled trial (n = 5049) was the only trial adequately powered to show a difference in metabolic acidosis, and the Plymouth randomized controlled trial (n = 2434) was only powered to show a difference in operative delivery for fetal distress. There were considerable differences in study design: the French randomized controlled trial used different inclusion criteria, and the Finnish randomized controlled trial (n = 1483) used a different metabolic acidosis definition. In the CTG+ST study arms, the larger Plymouth, Swedish and Dutch trials showed lower operative delivery and metabolic acidosis rates, whereas the smaller Finnish and French trials showed minor differences in operative delivery and higher metabolic acidosis rates. We conclude that the differences in outcomes are likely due to the considerable differences in study design and size. This will enhance heterogeneity effects in any subsequent meta-analysis. © 2014 The Authors. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons on behalf of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

20 keywords...

hide…