SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    World Health Organization (WHO). Recommended definition terminology and format for statistical tables related to the perinatal period and rise of a new certification for cause of perinatal deaths. Modifications recommended by FIGO as amended, October 14, 1976. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1977; 56: 247253.
  • 2
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Management of post term pregnancy. Practice Patterns No. 6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Washington, DC; 1997.
  • 3
    International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO). Report of the FIGO subcommittee on Perinatal Epidemiology and Health Statistics following a workshop in Cairo, November 11–18, 1984. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics: London, 1986; 54.
  • 4
    Divon MY, Haglund B, Nisell H, Olausson Otterblad P, Westgren M. Fetal and neonatal mortality in the post-term pregnancy: The impact of gestational age and fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178: 726731.
  • 5
    Campbell K, Östbye T, Irgens LM. Post-term birth: Risk factors and outcomes in a 10-year cohort of Norwegian births. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 89: 543548.
  • 6
    Ingemarsson I, Kjällén K. Stillbirths and rate of neonatal deths in 76 761 post-term pregnancies in Sweden, 1982–1991: a register study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997; 76: 658662.
  • 7
    Seyb ST, Berka RJ, Socol ML, Dooley SL. Risk of Cesarean delivery with elective induction of labor at term in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94: 600607.
  • 8
    Yeast JD, Jones A, Poskin M. Induction of labor and the relationship to Cesarean delivery: review of 7001 consecutive inductions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 628633.
  • 9
    Freeman RK, Lagrew DC Jr. Postdate pregnancy. In Obstetrics, normal and problem pregnancies, GabbeSG, NiebylJR, SimpsonJL (eds). Churchill Livingstone: Philadelphia, PA, 1996; 887897.
  • 10
    Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964; 24: 266268.
  • 11
    Sonek J, Shellhaas C. Cervical sonography: a review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 11: 7178.
  • 12
    Richardson DK, Schwartz JS, Weinbaum PJ, Gabbe SG. Diagnostic tests in obstetrics: a method for improved evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 152: 613618.
  • 13
    Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver–operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143: 2936.
  • 14
    Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver–operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983; 148: 839843.
  • 15
    Berghella V, Tolosa JE, Kuhlman K, Weiner S, Bolognese RJ, Wapner RJ. Cervical ultrasonography compared with manual examination as a predictor of preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 723730.
  • 16
    Önderoglu LS. Digital examination and transperineal ultrasonographic measurement of cervical length to assess risk of preterm delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1997; 59: 223228.
  • 17
    Gomez R, Galasso M, Romero R, Mazor M, Sorokin Y, Goncalves L, Treadwell M. Ultrasonographic examination of the uterine cervix is better than cervical digital examination as a predictor of the likelihood of premature delivery in patients with preterm labor and intact membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171: 956964.
  • 18
    Iams JD, Paraskos J, Landon MB, Teteris JN, Johnson FF. Cervical sonography in preterm labor. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 4046.
  • 19
    Chandra S, Crane JM, Hutchens D, Young DC. Transvaginal ultrasound and digital examination in predicting successful labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98: 26.
  • 20
    Gonen R, Degani S, Ron A. Prediction of successful induction of labor: comparison of transvaginal ultrasonography and the Bishop score. Eur J Ultrasound 1998; 7: 183187.
  • 21
    Reis FM, Gervasi MT, Florio P, Bracalente G, Fadalti M, Severi FM, Petraglia F. Prediction of successful induction of labor at term: role of clinical history digital examination, ultrasound assessment of the cervix, and fetal fibronectin assay. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 13611367.
  • 22
    Roman H, Verspyck E, Vercoustre L, Degre S, Col JY, Firmin JM, Caron P, Marpeau L. Does ultrasound examination when the cervix is unfavorable improve the prediction of failed labor induction? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 257262.
  • 23
    Roman H, Verspyck E, Vercoustre L, Degre S, Col JY, Firmin JM, Caron P, Marpeau L. The role of ultrasound and fetal fibronectin in predicting the length of induced labor when the cervix is unfavorable. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 367373.
  • 24
    Rozenberg P, Chevret S, Chastang C, Ville Y. Comparison of digital and ultrasonographic examination of the cervix in predicting time interval from induction to delivery in women with a low Bishop score. BJOG 2005; 112: 192196.
  • 25
    Gabriel R, Darnaud T, Chalot F, Gonzalez N, Leymarie F, Quereux C. Transvaginal sonography of the uterine cervix prior to labor induction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19: 254257.
  • 26
    Pandis GK, Papageorghiou T, Ramanathan VG, Thompson MO, Nicolaides KH. Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 623628.
  • 27
    Rane SM, Pandis GK, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. Pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length in prolonged pregnancy: the effect of parity in the prediction of induction-to-delivery interval. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 4044.
  • 28
    Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. Pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length in prolonged pregnancy: the effect of parity in the prediction of the need of Cesarean section. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 4548.
  • 29
    Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. The value of ultrasound in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24: 538549.
  • 30
    Yang SH, Roh CR, Kim JH. Transvaginal ultrasonography for cervical assessment before induction of labor. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23: 375382.
  • 31
    Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, Mercer BM, Moawad A, Das A, Thom E, McNellis D, Copper RL, Johnson F, Roberts JM. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 567572.
  • 32
    Ramanathan G, Yu C, Osei E, Nicolaides KH. Ultrasound examination at 37 weeks' gestation in the prediction of pregnancy outcome: the value of cervical assessment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 598603.
  • 33
    Vimercati A, Greco P, Lopalco PL, Loizzi V, Scioscia M, Mei L, Rossi AC, Selvaggi L. The value of ultrasonographic examination of the uterine cervix in predicting post-term pregnancy. J Perinat Med 2001; 29: 317321.
  • 34
    Rozenberg P, Goffinet F, Hessabi M. Comparison of the Bishop score, ultrasonographically measured cervical length, and fetal fibronectin assay in predicting time until delivery and type of delivery at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 108113.