Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Intrapartum Sonography in Prolonged Labor

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Intrapartum Ultrasonography for Labor Management

  • 669 Accesses

Abstract

A protracted or arrested active phase of labor represents a difficult dilemma of clinical obstetrics, as the situation has to be handled rapidly. Both unsuccessful operative vaginal delivery or a late Cesarean delivery could lead to serious injuries both to the mother and the fetus. In such clinical circumstances, the need for a “transparent” pelvic canal and objective and precise imaging measurements for the evaluation of labor outcome, instead blind and subjective clinical assessment, is nowhere more pertinent. The use of intrapartum ultrasound is not meant to change the classic algorithm of a prolonged or arrested labor monitoring, but to provide objective and reliable evaluations of the traditional crucial features. In this chapter we discuss the role of ultrasound in optimizing the outcome of prolonged labor.The findings regarding a prolonged first stage of labor in nulliparous demonstrated a better reliability of ultrasound evaluations and a good correlation between sonographic measurements and labor duration and outcome. A head to perineum distance less than 40 mm, an angle of progression of more than 110–120°, a progression distance more than 35 mm and an angle of direction of more than 105° represent good predictors for vaginal delivery and should encourage labor continuation.In the prolonged second stage of labor, head to perineum distance and angle of progression are significantly associated with the median duration and success operative vaginal delivery. Lack of head descent during pushing (angle of progression increase < 15°, head to perineum distance increase < 2mm or lack of the fetal head descent with respect to the infrapubic line) were associated with longer duration of operative vaginal delivery and vacuum extraction failure.Generally, the studies on prolonged labor were designed to evaluate the value of a certain parameter. We believe that it would be beneficial to investigate the value of multivariate analyses that include several parameters following the model of other feto-maternal successful predictions, as the combined test. Perhaps more accurate predictions could be obtained with the inclusion of other useful ultrasound determinations, such as asynclitism, pubic angle evaluation or head deflection estimation. As a matter of fact, when a clinician estimates the prognosis of an obstructed labor, takes into account all these features of the labor mechanism, and the role of ultrasound evaluation is to objectively elucidate by all means the delivery settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Towner D, Castro MA, Eby-Wilkens E, Gilbert WM. Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1709–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Verity L, et al. Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in second stage of labor: a cohort study. Lancet. 2001;13:1203–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Majoko F, Gardener G. Trial of instrumental delivery in theatre versus immediate caesarean section for anticipated difficult assisted births. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;10:CD005545.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ghi T, Eggebø T, Lees C, Kalache K, Rozenberg P, Youssef A, Salomon LJ, Tutschek B. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: intrapartum ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52(1):128–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tutschek B, Torkildsen EA, Eggebo TM. Comparison between ultrasound parameters and clinical examination to assess fetal head station in labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41:425–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Torkildsen EA, Salvesen KA, Eggebo TM. Prediction of delivery mode with transperineal ultrasound in women with prolonged first stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:702–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Eggebø TM, Hassan WA, Salvesen KA, Lindtjorn E, Lees CC. Sonographic prediction of vaginal delivery in prolonged labor: a two-center study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:195–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nishimura K, Yoshimura K, Kubo T, Hachisuga T. Objective diagnosis of arrested labor on transperineal ultrasound. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2016;42(7):803–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vacca A. Vacuum-assisted delivery: an analysis of traction force and maternal and neonatal outcome. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;46:124–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dückelmann AM, Bamberg C, Michaelis SA, Lange J, Nonnenmacher A, Dudenhausen JW, Kalache KD. Measurement of fetal head descent using the 'angle of progression' on transperineal ultrasound imaging is reliable regardless of fetal head station or ultrasound expertise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35(2):216–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kasbaoui S, Séverac F, Aïssi G, Gaudineau A, Lecointre L, Akladios C, Favre R, Langer B, Sananès N. Predicting the difficulty of operative vaginal delivery by ultrasound measurement of fetal head station. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(5):507.e1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kalache KD, Duckelmann AM, Michaelis SA, Lange J, Cichon G, Dudenhausen JW. Transperineal ultrasound imaging in prolonged second stage of labor with occipitoanterior presenting fetuses: how well does the ‘angle of progression’ predict the mode of delivery? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:326–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lau WL, Leung WC, Chin R. What is the best transperineal ultrasound parameter for predicting success of vacuum extraction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:735–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gilboa Y, Kivilevitch Z, Spira M, Kedem A, Katorza E, Moran O, Achiron R. Head progression distance in prolonged second stage of labor: relationship with mode of delivery and fetal head station. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41(4):436–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bultez T, Quibel T, Bouhanna P, Popowski T, Resche-Rigon M, Rozenberg P. Angle of fetal head progression measured using transperineal ultrasound as a predictive factor of vacuum extraction failure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:86–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sainz JA, Borrero C, Aquise A, Serrano R, Gutierrez L, Fernandez-Palacin A. Utility of intrapartum transperineal ultrasound to predict cases of failure in vacuum extraction attempt and need of cesarean section to complete delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:1348–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sainz JA, Borrero C, Fernández-Palacín A, Aquise A, Valdivieso P, Pastor L, Garrido R. Intrapartum transperineal ultrasound as a predictor of instrumentation difficulty with vacuum-assisted delivery in primiparous women. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28(17):2041–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahrs BH, Usman S, Ghi T, Youssef A, Torkildsen EA, Lindtjørn E, Østborg TB, Benediktsdottir S, Brooks L, Harmsen L, Romundstad PR, Salvesen KÅ, Lees CC, Eggebø TM. Sonographic prediction of outcome of vacuum deliveries: a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(1):69.e1–69.e10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bellussi F, Ghi T, Youssef A, Cataneo I, Salsi G, Simonazzi G, Pilu G. Intrapartum ultrasound to differentiate flexion and deflexion in Occipitoposterior rotation. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;42(4):249–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Henrich W, Dudenhausen J, Fuchs I, Kamena A, Tutschek B. Intrapartum translabial ultrasound (ITU): sonographic landmarks and correlation with successful vacuum extraction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28:753–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cuerva MJ, Bamberg C, Tobias P, Gil MM, De La Calle M, Bartha JL. Use of intrapartum ultrasound in the prediction of complicated operative forceps delivery of fetuses in non-occiput posterior position. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:687–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kahrs BH, Usman S, Ghi T, Youssef A, Torkildsen EA, Lindtjørn E, Østborg TB, Benediktsdottir S, Brooks L, Harmsen L, Salvesen KÅ, Lees CC, Eggebø TM. Descent of fetal head during active pushing: secondary analysis of prospective cohort study investigating ultrasound examination before operative vaginal delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;54(4):524–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Youssef A, Montaguti E, Dodaro MG, Kamel R, Rizzo N, Pilu G. Levator ani muscle co-activation at term is associated with a longer second stage of labor in nulliparous women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;53:686–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kamel R, Montaguti E, Nicolaides KH, Soliman M, Dodaro MG, Negm S, Pilu G, Momtaz M, Youssef A. Contraction of the levator ani muscle during Valsalva maneuver (co-activation) is associated with a longer active second stage of labor in nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220:189.e1–e8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bellussi F, Alcamisi L, Guizzardi G, Parma D, Pilu G. Traditionally vs sonographically coached pushing in second stage of labor: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52:87–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gilboa Y, Frenkel TI, Schlesinger Y, Rousseau S, Hamiel D, Achiron R, Perlman S. Visual biofeedback using transperineal ultrasound in second stage of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52:91–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lemos A, Amorim MM, Dornelas de Andrade A, de Souza AI, Cabral Filho JE, Correia JB. Pushing/bearing down methods for the second stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015:CD009124.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 154 Summary: operative vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(5):1118–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Van Ham MA, Van Dongen PW, Mulder J. Maternal consequences of caesarean section. A retrospective study of intra-operative and post-operative maternal complications of caesarean section during a 10-year period. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1997;74:1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dupuis O, Silveira R, Zentner A, et al. Birth simulator: reliability of transvaginal assessment of fetal head station as defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists classification. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:868–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sherer DM, Abulafia O. Intrapartum assessment of fetal head engagement: comparison between transvaginal digital and transabdominal ultrasound determinations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:430–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Eggebo TM, Wilhelm-Benartzi C, Hassan WA, Usman S, Salvesen KA, Lees CC. A model to predict vaginal delivery in nulliparous women based on maternal characteristics and intrapartum ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:362.e1-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Tutschek B, Braun T, Chantraine F, Henrich W. A study of progress of labour using intrapartum translabial ultrasound, assessing head station, direction, and angle of descent. BJOG. 2011;118(1):62–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bamberg C, Scheuermann S, Slowinski T, et al. Relationship between fetal head station established using an open magnetic resonance imaging scanner and the angle of progression determined by transperineal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:712–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Iliescu D, Tudorache S, Dragusin R, Carbunaru O, Patru C, Florea M, Gheonea IA. The angle of progression at station 0 and in magnetic resonance and transperineal ultrasound assessment. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2015;2015:748327.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Suzuki S. Comment on: predicting the difficulty of operative vaginal delivery by ultrasound measurements of the fetal head station. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(1):149–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Rayburn WF, Siemers K, Legino L, Nabity MR, Anderson JC, Patil KD. Dystocia in late labor: determining fetal position by clinical and ultrasonic measures. Am J Perinatol. 1989;6:316–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Akmal S, Kametas N, Tsoi E, Hargreaves C, Nicolaides KH. Comparison of transvaginal digital examination with intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head position before instrumental delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21(5):437–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Wong GY, Mok YM, Wong SF. Transabdominal ultrasound assessment of the fetal head and the accuracy of vacuum cup application. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;98:120–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hinkson L, Henrich W, Tutschek B. OC05.01: Rotational forceps delivery: a novel role of intrapartum ultrasound for quality control and teaching. Ultrasound Obstet and Gynecol. Volume54, IssueS1 Supplement: Abstracts of the 29th World Congress on Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 12–16 October 2019, Berlin, Germany October 2019 Pages 11-11.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Carseldine WJ, Phipps H, Zawada SF, Campbell NT, Ludlow JP, Krishnan SY, DE Vries BS. Does occiput posterior position in the second stage of labour increase the operative delivery rate? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;53(3):265–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Aiken CE, Aiken AR, Brockelsby JC, Scott JG. Factors influencing the likelihood of instrumental delivery success. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:796–803.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Ramphul M, Ooi PV, Burke G, Kennelly MM, Said SA, Montgomery AA, Murphy DJ. Instrumental delivery and ultrasound: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of ultrasound assessment of the fetal head position versus standard care as an approach to prevent morbidity at instrumental delivery. BJOG. 2014;121(8):1029–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ghi T, Dall'Asta A, Masturzo B, Tassis B, Martinelli M, Volpe N, Prefumo F, Rizzo G, Pilu G, Cariello L, Sabbioni L, Morselli-Labate AM, Todros T, Frusca T. Randomised Italian Sonography for occiput POSition trial ante vacuum (R.I.S.POS.T.A.). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52(6):699–705.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lewin D, Sadoul G, Beuret T. Measuring the height of a cephalic presentation: an objective assessment of station. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1977;7:369–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Dietz HP, Lanzarone V. Measuring engagement of the fetal head: validity and reproducibility of a new ultrasound technique. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25(2):165–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Barbera AF, Pombar X, Perugino G, Lezotte DC, Hobbins JC. A new method to assess fetal head descent in labor with transperineal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33(3):313–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Eggebo TM. Re: Narrow subpubic arch angle is associated with higher risk of persistent occiput posterior position at delivery. T. Ghi, A. Youssef, F. Martelli, F. Bellussi, E. Aiello, G. Pilu, N. Rizzo, T. Frusca, D. Arduini and G. Rizzo. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;48:511-515. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:425.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ben-Haroush A, Melamed N, Kaplan B, Yogev Y. Predictors of failed operative vaginal delivery: a single-center experience. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:308–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gopalani S, Bennett K, Critchlow C. Factors predictive of failed operative vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:896–902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Ghi T, Maroni E, Youssef A, Morselli-Labate A, et al. Sonographic pattern of fetal head descent: relationship with duration of active second stage of labor and occiput position at delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44:82–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Iliescu DG, Dragusin RC, Cernea D, Patru CL, Florea M, Tudorache S. Intrapartum ultrasound—an integrated approach for best prognosis. Med Ultrason. 2017;19(1):932.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Verheijen EC, Raven JH, Hofmeyr GJ. Fundal pressure during the second stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;4:CD006067. pub2. Review

    Google Scholar 

  54. Merhi ZO, Awonuga AO. The role of uterine fundal pressure in the management of the second stage of labor: a reappraisal. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2005;60:599–603. Review

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kline-Kaye V, Miller-Slade D. The use of fundal pressure during the second stage of labour. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1990;19:511–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Zanconato G, Cavaliere E, Cherubini G, et al. Fundal pressure (Kristeller maneuver) during labor in current obstetric practice: assessment of prevalence and feto-maternal effects. Minerva Ginecol. 2014;66:239–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Moiety FM, Azzam AZ. Fundal pressure during the second stage of labor in a tertiary obstetric center: a prospective analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40(4):946–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Malvasi A, Zaami S, Tinelli A, Trojano G, Montanari Vergallo G, Marinelli E. Kristeller maneuvers or fundal pressure and maternal/neonatal morbidity: obstetric and judicial literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;32(15):2598–607.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ghi T, Farina A, Pedrazzi A, Rizzo N, Pelusi G, Pilu G. Diagnosis of station and rotation of the fetal head in the second stage of labor with intrapartum translabial ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33(3):331–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Youssef A, Maroni E, Cariello L, Bellussi F, Montaguti E, Salsi G, Morselli-Labate AM, Paccapelo A, Rizzo N, Pilu G, Ghi T. Fetal head-symphysis distance and mode of delivery in the second stage of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014;93(10):1011–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Ghi T, Maroni E, Youssef A, Morselli-Labate AM, Paccapelo A, Montaguti E, Rizzo N, Pilu G. Sonographic pattern of fetal head descent: relationship with duration of active second stage of labor and occiput position at delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44(1):82–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Ghi T, Youssef A, Pilu G, Malvasi A, Ragusa A. Intrapartum sonographic imaging of fetal head asynclitism. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012;39(2):238–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Malvasi A, Stark M, Ghi T, Farine D, Guido M, Tinelli A. Intrapartum sonography for fetal head asynclitism and transverse position: sonographic signs and comparison of diagnostic performance between transvaginal and digital examination. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(5):508–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Ghi T, Dall’Asta A, Kiener A, Volpe N, Suprani A, Frusca T. Intrapartum diagnosis of posterior asynclitism using two-dimensional transperineal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:803–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Malvasi A, Tinelli A. Intrapartum sonography asynclitism diagnosis by transperineal ultrasonography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017;1:1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Ghi T, Bellussi F, Pilu G. Sonographic diagnosis of lateral asynclitism: a new subtype of fetal head malposition as a main determinant of early labor arrest. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45(2):229–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Malvasi A, Barbera A, Ghi T, Tinelli A. Lateral asynclitism: introduction of a new terminology associated to specific fetal position of the fetal head diagnosed by ultrasound in the second stage of labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28:1839–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Ghi T, Youssef A, Martelli F, et al. Narrow subpubic arch angle is associated with higher risk of persistent occiput posterior position at delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:511–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Ghi T, Bellussi F, Azzarone C, Krsmanovic J, Franchi L, Youssef A, Lenzi J, Fantini MP, Frusca T, Pilu G. The "occiput-spine angle": a new sonographic index of fetal head deflexion during the first stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(1):84.e1-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Maged AM, Soliman EM, Abdellatif AA, Nabil M, Said OI, Mohesen MN, Raslan AN, Elbaradie SMY. Measurement of the fetal occiput-spine angle during the first stage of labor as predictor of the progress and outcome of labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;32(14):2332–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Craiova, Craiova, Romania

    Dominic Gabriel Iliescu, Roxana Cristina Dragusin & Dira Laurentiu

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Emergency County Hospital Craiova, Craiova, Romania

    Dominic Gabriel Iliescu, Roxana Cristina Dragusin & Dira Laurentiu

Authors
  1. Dominic Gabriel Iliescu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roxana Cristina Dragusin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dira Laurentiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, Santa Maria Hospital, GVM Care and Research, Bari, Italy

    Antonio Malvasi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Iliescu, D.G., Dragusin, R.C., Laurentiu, D. (2021). The Role of Intrapartum Sonography in Prolonged Labor. In: Malvasi, A. (eds) Intrapartum Ultrasonography for Labor Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57595-3_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57595-3_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57594-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57595-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation