ITEMS IN AFP WITH MESH TERM:
Intrapartum Fetal Monitoring - Article
ABSTRACT: Continuous electronic fetal monitoring was developed in the 1960s to assist in the diagnosis of fetal hypoxia during labor. Continuous electronic fetal monitoring has been shown to reduce the incidence of neonatal seizures, but there has been no beneficial effect in decreasing cerebral palsy or neonatal Continuous electronic fetal monitoring was developed in the 1960s to assist in the diagnosis of fetal hypoxia during labor. Continuous electronic fetal monitoring has been shown to reduce the incidence of neonatal seizures, but there has been no beneficial effect in decreasing cerebral palsy or neonatal mortality. Intraobserver variability may play a major role in its interpretation. To provide a systematic approach to interpreting the electronic fetal monitor tracing, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development convened a workshop in 2008 to revise the accepted definitions for electronic fetal monitor tracing. The key elements include assessment of baseline heart rate, presence or absence of variability, and interpretation of periodic changes. The workshop introduced a new classification scheme for decision making with regard to tracings. This system can be used in conjunction with the Advanced Life Support in Obstetrics course mnemonic, DR C BRAVADO, to assist in the systematic interpretation of fetal monitoring. DR C BRAVADO incorporates maternal and fetal risk factors (DR = determine risk), contractions (C), the fetal monitor strip (BRA = baseline rate, V = variability, A = accelerations, and D = decelerations), and interpretation (O = overall assessment).
ABSTRACT: Electronic fetal heart rate monitoring is commonly used to assess fetal well-being during labor. Although detection of fetal compromise is one benefit of fetal monitoring, there are also risks, including false-positive tests that may result in unnecessary surgical intervention. Since variable and inconsistent interpretation of fetal heart rate tracings may affect management, a systematic approach to interpreting the patterns is important. The fetal heart rate undergoes constant and minute adjustments in response to the fetal environment and stimuli. Fetal heart rate patterns are classified as reassuring, nonreassuring or ominous. Nonreassuring patterns such as fetal tachycardia, bradycardia and late decelerations with good short-term variability require intervention to rule out fetal acidosis. Ominous patterns require emergency intrauterine fetal resuscitation and immediate delivery. Differentiating between a reassuring and nonreassuring fetal heart rate pattern is the essence of accurate interpretation, which is essential to guide appropriate triage decisions.
Common Questions About Pacemakers - Article
ABSTRACT: Pacemakers are indicated in patients with certain symptomatic bradyarrhythmias caused by sinus node dysfunction, and in those with frequent, prolonged sinus pauses. Patients with third-degree or complete atrioventricular (AV) block benefit from pacemaker placement, as do those with type II second-degree AV block because of the risk of progression to complete AV block. The use of pacemakers in patients with type I second-degree AV block is controversial. Patients with first-degree AV block generally should not receive a pacemaker except when the PR interval is significantly prolonged and the patient is symptomatic. Although some guidelines recommend pacemaker implantation for patients with hypersensitive carotid sinus syndrome, recent evidence has not shown benefit. Some older patients with severe neurocardiogenic syncope may benefit from pacemakers, but most patients with this disorder do not. Cardiac resynchronization therapy improves mortality rates and some other disease-specific measures in patients who have a QRS duration of 150 milliseconds or greater and New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure. Patients with class II heart failure and a QRS of 150 milliseconds or greater also appear to benefit, but there is insufficient evidence to support the use of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with class I heart failure. Cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with a QRS of 120 to 150 milliseconds does not reduce rates of hospitalization or death.