AJP Rep 2016; 06(04): e378-e383
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1592413
Case Report
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Standard External Doppler Fetal Heart Tracings versus External Fetal Electrocardiogram in Very Preterm Gestation: A Pilot Study

Gary Fruhman
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri
,
Jeffrey A. Gavard
2   Division of Research, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri
,
Kristina McCormick
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri
,
Judy Wilson-Griffin
3   SSM Health–Saint Mary's Hospital, Saint Louis, Missouri
,
Erol Amon
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri
,
Gilad A. Gross
1   Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

24 May 2016

09 August 2016

Publication Date:
04 November 2016 (online)

Abstract

Introduction Very preterm babies can be difficult to monitor using standard external Doppler fetal heart tracings (eFHR). External fetal electrocardiogram (fECG) is a potential alternative.

Methods This was a prospective observational pilot study of hospitalized patients at 24 to 28 weeks' gestation. A total of 30 women were traced for up to 2 hours using eFHR followed by up to 2 hours using fECG. The percentage of time the fetal heart rate was traced during the 2-hour window for each modality was calculated. Differences of ≥ 60, ≥ 80, and ≥ 90% total time traced were compared between modalities using McNemar's test. Differences were also assessed for each method between nonobese (body mass index [BMI] < 30 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) women using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests.

Results Superior performance was found with eFHR at ≥ 60% (93.3 vs. 46.7%, p < 0.001), ≥ 80% (80.0 vs. 30.0%, p < 0.001), and ≥ 90% (60.0 vs. 23.3%, p < 0.01) total time traced. There was a statistically significant finding favoring nonobese women at ≥ 80% total time traced using fECG (7.1 vs. 50.0%, p = 0.017).

Conclusion With current technology fECG performance in very preterm gestation was worse than conventional eFHR, although fECG may have a role in nonobese patients.