Справка
x
Поиск
Закладки
Озвучить книгу
Изменить режим чтения
Изменить размер шрифта
Оглавление
Для озвучивания и цитирования книги перейдите в режим постраничного просмотра.
Подготовка шейки матки к родам и родовозбуждение
Список литературы
Поставить закладку
Rayburn W.F., Zhang J. Rising rates of labor induction: Present concerns and future strategies // Obstet. Gynecol. 2002. Vol. 100, № 1. P. 164–167.
World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: Induction of labour at or beyond term // WHO recommendations: Induction of labour at or beyond term. 2018.
Martin J.A. et al. Births: Final for 2017 // Natl. Vital Stat. Reports. 2018. Vol. 67, № 8. P. 1–49.
Aaron Caughey I.B. et al. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 176: Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes of Elective Induction of Labor. 2009. № 176.
Hedegaard M. et al. Perinatal outcomes following an earlier post-term labour induction policy: A historical cohort study // BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2015. Vol. 122, № 10. P. 1377–1385.
Hussain A.A. et al. Elective induction for pregnancies at or beyond 41 weeks of gestation and its impact on stillbirths: A systematic review with meta-analysis // BMC Public Health. BioMed Central Ltd, 2011. Vol. 11, № SUPPL. 3. P. S5.
Laughon S.K. et al. Induction of labor in a contemporary obstetric cohort // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2012. Vol. 206, № 6. P. 486.e1-486.e9.
Melamed N. et al. PInduction of labor before 40 weeks is associated with lower rate of cesarean delivery in women with gestational diabetes mellitus resented at the 36th annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Atlanta, GA, February 1-6, 2016. // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2016. Vol. 214, № 3. P. 364.e1-364.e8.
Souter V. et al. Maternal and newborn outcomes with elective induction of labor at term // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019. Vol. 220, № 3.
Chodankar R., Sood A., Gupta J. An overview of the past, current and future trends for cervical ripening in induction of labour // Obstet. Gynaecol. 2017. Vol. 19, № 3. P. 219–226.
Gupta J. et al. Synthetic osmotic dilators in the induction of labour—An international multicentre observational study // Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2018. Vol. 229. P. 70–75.
Marconi A. Recent advances in the induction of labor [version 1; peer review: 2 approved] // F1000Research. Faculty of 1000 Ltd, 2019. Vol. 8.
Penfield C.A., Wing D.A. Labor Induction Techniques: Which Is the Best? // Obstet. Gynecol. Clin. North Am. Elsevier Inc, 2017. Vol. 44, № 4. P. 567–582.
Bailit J.L. et al. Nonmedically indicated induction vs expectant treatment in term nulliparous women // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Mosby, Inc, 2015. Vol. 212, № 1. P. 103.e1-103.e7.
Grobman W.A. et al. Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women // N. Engl. J. Med. 2018. Vol. 379, № 6. P. 513–523.
Nippita T.A. et al. Methods of classification for women undergoing induction of labour: A systematic review and novel classification system // BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2015. Vol. 122, № 10. P. 1284–1293.
Nakano T. et al. Factors associated with emergency cesarean delivery during induction of labor in nulliparous women aged 35 years or older at term // J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2018. Vol. 44, № 9. P. 1747–1751.
Bergholt T. et al. Maternal age and risk of cesarean section in women with induced labor at term—A Nordic register-based study // Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2020. Vol. 99, № 2. P. 283–289.
Gunatilake R.P. et al. Predictors of failed trial of labor among women with an extremely obese body mass index // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc, 2013. Vol. 209, № 6. P. 562.e1-562.e5.
Maged A.M. et al. Effect of maternal obesity on labor induction in postdate pregnancy // Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2018. Vol. 298, № 1.
Wolfe H. et al. Risk of cesarean in obese nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix: Elective induction vs expectant management at term // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc, 2014. Vol. 211, № 1. P. 53.e1-53.e5.
Carpenter J.R. Intrapartum management of the obese gravida // Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016. Vol. 59, № 1. P. 172–179.
Carlson N.S., Hernandez T.L., Hurt K.J. Parturition dysfunction in obesity: Time to target the pathobiology // Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, 2015. Vol. 13, № 1. P. 1–14.
Garabedian M.J. et al. Extreme morbid obesity and labor outcome in nulliparous women at term // Am. J. Perinatol. 2011. Vol. 28, № 9. P. 729–734.
Rossi R. et al. Predictive Model for Failed Induction of Labor Among Obese Women // Obstet. Gynecol. Wolters Kluwer Health, 2019. Vol. 134, № 3.
Gibbs Pickens C.M. et al. Term Elective Induction of Labor and Pregnancy Outcomes among Obese Women and Their Offspring // Obstet. Gynecol. 2018. Vol. 131, № 1. P. 12–22.
Kawakita T. et al. 53: Predicting vaginal delivery in nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017. Vol. 216, № 1. P. S38–S39.
Hermann M. et al. The risk of prelabor and intrapartum cesarean delivery among overweight and obese women: Possible preventive actions // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Ltd, 2015. Vol. 212, № 2. P. 241.e1-241.e9.
Coates D. et al. A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour // PLoS One / ed. Mastrolia S.A. 2020. Vol. 15, № 1. P. e0228196.
Stålberg K. et al. A narrow pelvic outlet increases the risk for emergency cesarean section // Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2006. Vol. 85, № 7. P. 821–824.
Korhonen U., Taipale P., Heinonen S. The diagnostic accuracy of pelvic measurements: threshold values and fetal size // Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2014. Vol. 290, № 4. P. 643–648.
Gleason R.L. et al. A safe, low-cost, easy-to-use 3D camera platform to assess risk of obstructed labor due to cephalopelvic disproportion // PLoS One. 2018. Vol. 13, № 9. P. 1–30.
Malonga F.K. et al. External anthropometric measurement and pelvimetry among nulliparous women in lubumbashi: Risk factors and predictive score of mechanical dystocia // Pan Afr. Med. J. 2018. Vol. 31. P. 1–9.
Ehrenthal D.B., Jiang X., Strobino D.M. Labor induction and the risk of a cesarean delivery among nulliparous women at term // Obstet. Gynecol. 2010. Vol. 116, № 1. P. 35–42.
Kenny T.H. et al. Induction of labor in women with a history of fast labor // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. Informa UK Ltd, 2016. Vol. 29, № 1. P. 148–153.
Saccone G. et al. Induction of labor at full-term in pregnant women with uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials // Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2019. Vol. 98, № 8.
Ayala N.K., Lewkowitz A.K., Rouse D.J. Delivery at 39 Weeks of Gestation // Obstet. Gynecol. 2020. Vol. 135, № 4. P. 949–952.
Sinkey R.G. et al. Elective Induction of Labor in the 39th Week of Gestation Compared With Expectant Management of Low-Risk Multiparous Women // Obstet. Gynecol. 2019. Vol. 134, № 2. P. 282–287.
Caughey A.B. et al. Maternal and obstetric complications of pregnancy are associated with increasing gestational age at term // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2007. Vol. 196, № 2. P. 155.e1-155.e6.
Middleton P., Shepherd E., Crowther C.A. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2018. Vol. 2018, № 5.
Teixeira C. et al. The Bishop Score as a determinant of labour induction success: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2012. Vol. 286, № 3. P. 739–753.
Subramanian D., Penna L. Induction of labour // Best Practice in Labour and Delivery. 2009. № July. 195–206 p.
Подготовка шейки матки к родам и родовозбуждение. 2012.
Giugliano E. et al. The risk factors for failure of labor induction: A cohort study // J. Obstet. Gynecol. India. 2014. Vol. 64, № 2. P. 111–115.
Magro-Malosso E.R. et al. Induction of labour for suspected macrosomia at term in non-diabetic women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials // BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2017. Vol. 124, № 3. P. 414–421.
Boulvain M. et al. Induction of labour at or near term for suspected fetal macrosomia // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2016. Vol. 2016, № 5.
Shrem G. et al. Isolated Oligohydramnios at Term as an Indication for Labor Induction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis // Fetal Diagn. Ther. 2016. Vol. 40, № 3. P. 161–173.
Brzezinski-Sinai N.A. et al. Induction of labor in cases of late preterm isolated oligohydramnios: is it justified? // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. 2019. Vol. 32, № 14. P. 2271–2279.
Zeino S. et al. Delivery outcomes of term pregnancy complicated by idiopathic polyhydramnios // J. Gynecol. Obstet. Hum. Reprod. Elsevier Masson SAS, 2017. Vol. 46, № 4. P. 349–354.
Luo Q.Q. et al. Idiopathic polyhydramnios at term and pregnancy outcomes: a multicenter observational study // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. 2017. Vol. 30, № 14. P. 1755–1759.
Aviram A. et al. Association of isolated polyhydramnios at or beyond 34 weeks of gestation and pregnancy outcome // Obstet. Gynecol. 2015. Vol. 125, № 4. P. 825–832.
Dashe J.S., Pressman E.K., Hibbard J.U. SMFM Consult Series #46: Evaluation and management of polyhydramnios // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2018. Vol. 219, № 4. P. B2–B8.
Cahill A.G. et al. Is vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) or elective repeat cesarean safer in women with a prior vaginal delivery? // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2006. Vol. 195, № 4. P. 1143–1147.
Carlsson Fagerberg M., Källén K. Third-trimester prediction of successful vaginal birth after one cesarean delivery—A Swedish model // Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2020. Vol. 99, № 5. P. 660–668.
Grobman W. a et al. Development of a Nomogram for Prediction // Obstet. Gynecol. 2007. Vol. 109, № 4. P. 806–812.
Chaillet N. et al. Validation of a prediction model for vaginal birth after caesarean. // J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 2013. Vol. 35, № 2. P. 119–124.
Li Y.X. et al. Predicting the success of vaginal birth after caesarean delivery: A retrospective cohort study in China // BMJ Open. 2019. Vol. 9, № 5. P. 1–8.
de Vaan M.D.T. et al. Mechanical methods for induction of labour // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2019. Vol. 2019, № 10.
Hofmeyr G.J., Gülmezoglu A.M., Pileggi C. Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2010. № 1.
Hapangama D., Neilson J.P. Mifepristone for induction of labour // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2009. № 3.
Schoen C., Navathe R. Failed induction of labor // Semin. Perinatol. Elsevier, 2015. Vol. 39, № 6. P. 483–487.
Vahratian A. et al. Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas // Obstet. Gynecol. 2005. Vol. 105, № 4. P. 698–704.
Alfirevic Z. et al. Which method is best for the induction of labour? A systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis // Health Technol. Assess. (Rockv). 2016. Vol. 20, № 65. P. 1–583.
Thomas J. et al. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2014. Vol. 2014, № 6.
Мкб Z. Нормальная беременность. 2020.
Crane J.M.G. Factors predicting labor induction success: A critical analysis // Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2006. Vol. 49, № 3. P. 573–584.
Verhoeven C.J.M. et al. Transvaginal sonographic assessment of cervical length and wedging for predicting outcome of labor induction at term: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2013. Vol. 42, № 5. P. 500–508.
Sääv I. et al. Medical abortion in lactating women - Low levels of mifepristone in breast milk // Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2010. Vol. 89, № 5. P. 618–622.
Alfirevic Z., Kelly A.J., Dowswell T. Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2009. № 4.
Fuchs A.R. et al. Oxytocin receptors in the human uterus during pregnancy and parturition // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1984. Vol. 150, № 6. P. 734–741.
Gibson K.S., Waters T.P. Measures of success: Prediction of successful labor induction // Semin. Perinatol. Elsevier, 2015. Vol. 39, № 6. P. 475–482.
Tesemma M.G., Sori D.A., Gemeda D.H. High dose and low dose oxytocin regimens as determinants of successful labor induction: A multicenter comparative study // BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2020. Vol. 20, № 1. P. 4–11.
Budden A., Chen L.J.Y., Henry A. High-dose versus low-dose oxytocin infusion regimens for induction of labour at term // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2014. Vol. 2016, № 3.
Selin L. et al. High-dose versus low-dose of oxytocin for labour augmentation: a randomised controlled trial // Women and Birth. Australian College of Midwives, 2019. Vol. 32, № 4. P. 356–363.
Diven L. et al. Discontinuing oxytocin infusion in the active phase of labor: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Obstet. Gynecol. Wolters Kluwer Health, 2017. Vol. 130, № 5.
Boie S. et al. Discontinuation of intravenous oxytocin in the active phase of induced labour // Cochrane database Syst. Rev. 2018. Vol. 8. P. CD012274.
DeVivo V. et al. Early amniotomy after cervical ripening for induction of labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier, 2019.
De Vivo V. et al. Early amniotomy after cervical ripening for induction of labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2020. Vol. 222, № 4. P. 320–329.
Connolly K.A. et al. A randomized trial of Foley balloon induction of labor trial in nulliparas (FIAT-N) // American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016. Vol. 215, № 3.
Levine L.D. et al. Mechanical and Pharmacologic Methods of Labor Induction: A Randomized Controlled Trial // Obstet. Gynecol. 2016. Vol. 128, № 6. P. 1357–1364.
Schoen C.N. et al. Intracervical Foley Catheter with and Without Oxytocin for Labor Induction: A Randomized Controlled Trial // Obstet. Gynecol. 2017.
Baev O.R. et al. A comparison between labor induction with only Dilapan-S and a combination of mifepristone and Dilapan-S in nulliparous women: a prospective pilot study // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. 2019.
Kehl S. et al. Double-balloon catheter and sequential vaginal prostaglandin E2 versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 alone for induction of labor after previous cesarean section // Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2016. Vol. 293, № 4. P. 757–765.
Selo-Ojeme D.O. et al. A randomised controlled trial of amniotomy and immediate oxytocin infusion versus amniotomy and delayed oxytocin infusion for induction of labour at term // Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2009. Vol. 279, № 6. P. 813–820.
Tan P.C. et al. Oxytocin After Amniotomy Labor Induction in Parous Women // Obstet. Gynecol. 2013. Vol. 121, № 2. P. 253–259.
Middleton P. et al. Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more) // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. Wiley-Blackwell, 2017. Vol. 2017, № 1.
National Collaborating Center for Women’s and Children’s Health. Multiple Pregnancy: twin and triplet pregnancies. Evidence Update. Commissioned by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. // NICE Guid. Guidel. 2013.
Fong F., Thangaratinam S., Zamora J. Increased stillbirth in uncomplicated monochorionic twin pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. // Obstet. Gynecol. 2013. Vol. 122, № 6. P. 1302.
Thangatorai R., Lim F.C., Nalliah S. Cervical pessary in the prevention of preterm births in multiple pregnancies with a short cervix: PRISMA compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. // J. Matern. Fetal. Neonatal Med. 2018. Vol. 31, № 12. P. 1638–1645.
Cheong-See F. et al. Prospective risk of stillbirth and neonatal complications in twin pregnancies: Systematic review and meta-analysis // BMJ. 2016. Vol. 354.
Lee H.-J. et al. Gestational age at delivery and neonatal outcome in uncomplicated twin pregnancies: what is the optimal gestational age for delivery according to chorionicity? // Obstet. Gynecol. Sci. 2016. Vol. 59, № 1. P. 9.
Chappell L.C. et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid versus placebo, and early term delivery versus expectant management, in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: Semifactorial randomised clinical trial // BMJ. 2012. Vol. 344, № 7862. P. 1–16.
Puljic A. et al. The risk of infant and fetal death by each additional week of expectant management in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy by gestational age // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2015. Vol. 212, № 5. P. 667.e1-667.e5.
Внутрипеченочный холестаз при беременности. 2020.
Gabzdyl E.M., Schlaeger J.M. Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: A critical clinical review // J. Perinat. Neonatal Nurs. 2015. Vol. 29, № 1. P. 41–50.
Cluver C. et al. Planned early delivery versus expectant management for hypertensive disorders from 34 weeks gestation to term // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2017. Vol. 2017, № 1.
Koopmans C.M. et al. Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring for gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia after 36 weeks’ gestation (HYPITAT): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial // Lancet. 2009. Vol. 374, № 9694. P. 979–988.
NICE. Hypertension in pregnancy: diagnosis and management (NG133) // NICE Guidel. 2020. № June 2019. P. 55.
Deliveries E. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice The Society for Maternal – Fetal Medicine. 2013. Vol. 121, № 4. P. 908–910.
Churchill D. et al. Interventionist versus expectant care for severe pre-eclampsia between 24 and 34 weeks’ gestation // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2018. Vol. 2018, № 10.
Chappell L.C. et al. Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial // Lancet. 2019. Vol. 394, № 10204. P. 1181–1190.
Butalia S. et al. Hypertension Canada’s 2018 Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension in Pregnancy // Can. J. Cardiol. 2018. Vol. 34, № 5. P. 526–531.
ACOG. ACOG Practice Bulletin Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician Gynecologists. Gestational Hypertension and Preeclampsia // Obstet. Gynecol. 2020. Vol. 135, № 6. P. e237–e260.
Mounier-Vehier C. et al. Hypertension and pregnancy: expert consensus statement from the French Society of Hypertension, an affiliate of the French Society of Cardiology // Fundam. Clin. Pharmacol. 2017. Vol. 31, № 1. P. 83–103.
Broekhuijsen K. et al. Immediate delivery versus expectant monitoring for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation (HYPITAT-II): An open-label, randomised controlled trial // Lancet. Elsevier Ltd, 2015. Vol. 385, № 9986. P. 2492–2501.
Berger H., Gagnon R., Sermer M. Guideline No. 393-Diabetes in Pregnancy // J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Canada. Elsevier Inc., 2019. Vol. 41, № 12. P. 1814-1825.e1.
Радзинский В.Е. et al. Эффективность Программированных Родов При Гестационном Сахарном Диабете В Снижении Частоты Кесарева Сечения // Акушерство и Гинекология Новости, Мнения, Обучение. 2019. Vol. 7, № 3. P. 25–31.
Rosenstein M.G. et al. The risk of stillbirth and infant death stratified by gestational age in women with gestational diabetes // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2012. Vol. 206, № 4. P. 309.e1-309.e7.
Boulvain M., Stan C.M., Irion O. Elective delivery in diabetic pregnant women // Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2009. № 4.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Diabetes in pregnancy : management from preconception to the postnatal period // NICe. 2015. № February. P. 2–65.
Pilliod R.A. et al. HHS Public Access. 2020. Vol. 32, № 3. P. 442–447.
Shields L.E., Goffman D., Caughey A.B. ACOG practice bulletin: Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists // Obstet. Gynecol. 2017. Vol. 130, № 4. P. e168–e186.
Witkop C.T. et al. Active compared with expectant delivery management in women with gestational diabetes: A systematic review // Obstet. Gynecol. 2009. Vol. 113, № 1. P. 206–217.
Metcalfe A. et al. Timing of delivery in women with diabetes: A population-based study // Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2020. Vol. 99, № 3. P. 341–349.
Regitz-Zagrosek V. et al. 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy // European Heart Journal. 2018. Vol. 39, № 34. 3165–3241 p.
Dotters-Katz S. et al. Cancer and pregnancy: The clinician’s perspective // Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 2014. Vol. 69, № 5. P. 277–286.
Albright C.M., Wenstrom K.D. Malignancies in pregnancy // Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. Elsevier Ltd, 2016. Vol. 33. P. 2–18.
Kuo K., Caughey A.B. Optimal timing of delivery for women with breast cancer, according to cancer stage and hormone status: a decision-analytic model // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. Informa UK Ltd., 2019. Vol. 32, № 3. P. 419–428.
Clegg D.R. Obstetric care // Trop. Doct. 2003. Vol. 33, № 3. P. 129.
Wennerholm U.B. et al. Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): Multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial // BMJ. 2019. Vol. 367.
Keulen J.K. et al. Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management until 42 weeks (INDEX): Multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial // BMJ. 2019. Vol. 364.
Vitner D. et al. Induction of labor versus expectant management among women with macrosomic neonates: a retrospective study // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. 2018. Vol. 7058.
Martins J.G., Biggio J.R., Abuhamad A. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #52: Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction: (Replaces Clinical Guideline Number 3, April 2012) // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2020. Vol. 223, № 4. P. B2–B17.
Spong C.Y. et al. Timing of indicated late-preterm and early-term birth // Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2011. Vol. 118, № 2. P. 323–333.
ACOG Committee Opinion No. 764: Medically Indicated Late-Preterm and Early-Term Deliveries // Obstet. Gynecol. 2019. Vol. 133, № 2. P. e151–e155.
Pilliod R.A. et al. The growth-restricted fetus: risk of mortality by each additional week of expectant management // J. Matern. Neonatal Med. Informa UK Ltd., 2019. Vol. 32, № 3. P. 442–447.
Estation B.E.W.E.G. G Uideline for the M Anagement of P Regnancy. 2011. № June 2000. P. 1–10.
McCowan L.M., Figueras F., Anderson N.H. Evidence-based national guidelines for the management of suspected fetal growth restriction: comparison, consensus, and controversy. // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018. Vol. 218, № 2S. P. S855–S868.
Trudell A.S. et al. Risk of stillbirth after 37 weeks in pregnancies complicated by small-for-gestational-age fetuses // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc., 2013. Vol. 208, № 5. P. 376.e1-376.e7.
Maggio L. et al. Perinatal outcomes with normal compared with elevated umbilical artery systolic-to-diastolic ratios in fetal growth restriction // Obstet. Gynecol. 2015. Vol. 125, № 4. P. 863–869.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Late intrauterine fetal death and stillbirth (Green–top Guideline No. 55) // Obstet. Evidence-Based Algorithms. 2016. № 55. P. 14–18.
Management C., For G. ACOG practice bulletin No. 102: Management of stillbirth // Obstet. Gynecol. 2009. Vol. 113, № 3. P. 748–761.
Management C., For G. ACOG practice bulletin no. 107: Induction of labor // Obstet. Gynecol. 2009. Vol. 114, № 2 PART 1. P. 386–397.
Nice. NICE Guidence: Induction of labour Evidence Update July 2013 // Evidence. 2013. Vol. 44, № July. P. 1–124.
Burgess J.L. et al. Risk of late-preterm stillbirth and neonatal morbidity for monochorionic and dichorionic twins // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Elsevier Inc, 2014. Vol. 210, № 6. P. 578.e1-578.e9.
Management of Monochorionic Twin Pregnancy: Green-top Guideline No. 51. // BJOG. 2017. Vol. 124, № 1. P. e1–e45.
Suzuki S. Single Fetal Demise at 10 - 14 Weeks of Monochorionic and Dichorionic Twin Pregnancy // J. Clin. Med. Res. 2016. Vol. 8, № 4. P. 331–333.
Meehan F.P., Magani I.M., Mortimer G. Perinatal mortality in multiple pregnancy patients // Acta Genet. Med. Gemellol. (Roma). 1988. Vol. 37, № 3–4. P. 331–337.
Mackie F.L. et al. Prognosis of the co-twin following spontaneous single intrauterine fetal death in twin pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis // BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2019. Vol. 126, № 5. P. 569–578.
Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. The Management of Women with Red Cell Antibodies during Pregnancy // Manag. Women with Red Cell Antibodies Dur. Pregnancy. 2014. № 65. P. 1–26.
Leduc D. et al. Induction of Labour // J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Canada. Elsevier Masson SAS, 2013. Vol. 35, № 9. P. 840–857.
Leduc D. et al. Induction of Labour: Review // J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Canada. Elsevier Masson SAS, 2015. Vol. 37, № 4. P. 380–381.
Sénat M.-V. et al. Prevention and management of genital herpes simplex infection during pregnancy and delivery: Guidelines from the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF). // Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2018. Vol. 224. P. 93–101.
ВИЧ-инфекция : Профилактика перинатальной передачи вируса иммунодефицита человека. 2017.
Mori R. et al. High dose versus low dose oxytocin for augmentation of delayed labour // Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews / ed. Mori R. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2011.
Consultation D.F.O.R. NICE - Induction of Labour guidelines // Induction labour 2008 Updat. 2007. Vol. 2007, № December 2007. P. 1–107.
Методическое письмо МЗ РФ №15-4/И/2-2570 от 04.03.2020 «Реанимация и стабилизация состояния новорожденных детей в родильном зале».
Jeer B. et a1. Perinatal and maternal outcomes according to timing of induction of labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis. // Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023 Sep;288. P. 175-182.
Для продолжения работы требуется
Регистрация
Предыдущая страница
Следующая страница
Оглавление
Список сокращений
Термины и определения
Подготовка шейки матки к родам и родовозбуждение
+
Список литературы
Приложение А1. Состав рабочей группы по разработке и пересмотру клинических рекомендаций
Приложение А2. Методология разработки клинических рекомендаций
Приложение А3. Справочные материалы, включая соответствие показаний к применению и противопоказаний, способов применения и доз лекарственных препаратов, инструкции по применению лекарственного препарата
Приложение Б. Алгоритмы действий врача
Приложение В. Информация для пациента
Приложение Г1-ГN. Шкалы оценки, вопросники и другие оценочные инструменты состояния пациента, приведенные в клинических рекомендациях
+
Данный блок поддерживает скрол*