The relation between obstetric conjugate diameter during pregnancy and the type of delivery: a narrative review

Mahmoud S. Satte

doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20230898

Authors

Mahmoud S. Satte Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20230898

Keywords:

Obstetrics, Conjugate, Diameter, Vaginal delivery, Cesarean

Abstract

Obstetric conjugate diameter is the first point of the maternal pelvis through which the head of the fetus has to pass during the stages of birth and it is the most important female pelvimetry during pregnancy. This review aims to find out the relation between obstetric conjugate diameter measured by radiography during pregnancy and the type of birth, vaginally, or by caesarean. Narrative review conducted at Najran Medicine College (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia).

METHODS: Articles review describing the association between obstetric conjugate diameters measured by radiography during the last stage of pregnancy and type of delivery were selected from the electronic database (PubMed, LILACS, SciELO, and Google scholar). The search date was on January to February 2023. This review showed that there is a relationship between obstetric conjugate diameter and the type of delivery and can be used in predicting the mode of birth (vaginal or cesarean). This knowledge is important for obstetricians and gynecologists to predict the type of childbirth, vaginally, or by cesarean.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional, and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343.

Gibbons L, Belizán JM, Lauer JA. The Global Numbers and Costs of Additionally Needed and Unnecessary Caesarean Sections Performed per Year: Overuse as a Barrier to Universal Coverage. Geneva: World Health Report. 2010. Available from: http://www.who.int/healthsystems/topics/ financing/healthreport/30C-sectioncosts.pdf. Accessed on 2 July 2020.

Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Lauer JA. Rates of cesarean section: analysis of global, regional, and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007;21(2):98-113.

Almnabri AA, Ansari EA, Abdulmane MM. Management of Placenta Previa During Pregnancy. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine. 2017;68(3):1549-53.

Radnia N, Manouchehrian N, Shayan A. Frequency and causes of emergency hysterectomy along with vaginal delivery and cesarean section in Hamadan, Iran. Electron Physician. 2017;9(6):4643-7.

Dhar H, Al-Busaidi I, Rathi B. A study of post-cesarean section wound infections in a regional referral hospital, Oman. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2014;14(2):e211-e217.

Irurhe NK, Duru FI, Ibeabuchi NM. X-ray pelvimetry and labor outcome in term pregnancy in a rural Nigerian population. Nig Q J Hosp Med. 2012; 22(2):113-6.

Bian X, Zhuang J, Cheng X. Combination of ultrasound pelvimetry and fetal sonography in predicting cephalopelvic disproportion. Chin Med J (Engl). 1997;110(12):942-5.

Aubry S, Padoina P, Petegnief Y. Can three-dimensional pelvimetry using low-dose stereo radiography replace low-dose CT pelvimetry? Diagn Interv Imaging. 2018;99(9):569-76.

Huerta-Enochian GS, Katz VL, Fox LK, Hamlin JA, Kollath JP. Magnetic resonance-based serial pelvimetry: do maternal pelvic dimensions change during pregnancy? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(6):1689-95.

Vazquez-Barragan MA, Garza-Baez A, Morales-Avalos R. Pelvimetry by reformatted Computed Tomography in 290 female pelvis. Morphometric variations regarding age. Int J Morphol. 2016;34(1):298-304.

Daghighi MH, Poureisa M, Ranjkesh M. Association Between Obstetric Conjugate Diameter Measured by Transabdominal Ultrasonography During Pregnancy and the Type of Delivery, Iran J Radiol. 2013;10(3):e93638.

Spörri S, Thoeny HC, Raio L. MR imaging pelvimetry: a useful adjunct in the treatment of women at risk for dystocia? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(1):137-44.

Kim SJ, Kim JH, Lee DW. Compare the architectural differences in the body pelvis of Korean women and their association with mode of delivery by computed tomography. Korean J Obstet Gynecol 2011;54(4):171-4.

Adadevoh SW, Hobbs C, Elkins TE. The relation of the true conjugate to maternal height and obstetric performance in Ghanaians. Int J Gynecol. 1989;28(3):243-51.

Lao TT, Chin RK, Leung BF. Is X-ray pelvimetry useful in a trial of labor after cesarean section? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1987;24(4):277-83.

Sonal B, Shalini R, Chandra SK, Neerja G. Ultrasonic obstetric conjugate measurement: a practical pelvimetric tool. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2006;56(3):212-5.

Salk I, Cetin M, Salk S, Cetinb A. Determining the Incidence of Gynecoid Pelvis Using Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography in Nonpregnant Multiparous Women. Med Princ Pract. 2015;25(1):40-8.

Keller TM, Rake A, Michel SC. Obstetric MR pelvimetry: reference values and evaluation of inter- and intraobserver error and intraindividual variability. Radiology. 2003; 227(1):37-43.

Sarkar R, Singh CPK. Measurement of Obstetrical Conjugate Diameter by USG and its association with mode of Delivery. Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences. 2019;18(2):10-2.

Liao KD, Yu YH, Li YG. Three-dimensional Magnetic Resonance Pelvimetry: A New Technique for Evaluating the Female Pelvis in Pregnancy. Eur J Radiol. 2018;102:208-12.

Ogedengbe OK, Okikiolu O, Macrae RI, Giwa-Osagie OF. Erect Lateral Pelvimetry and the Outcome of Labor in Lagos. J Natl Med Assoc. 1993; 85(1):41-4.