Cochrane · systematic review · CD000184
Interventions for helping to turn term breech babies to head first presentation when using external cephalic version
Cluver, C, Gyte, GML, Sinclair, M, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
Pregnancy and ChildbirthAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
14
current version
GRADE rated
10
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 4 · 28.6%Very low 3 · 21.4%Low 3 · 21.4%Moderate 4 · 28.6%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Beta stimulant compared with placebo for helping to turn babies with breech presentation when ECV was used
Population: patients with breech presentation
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cephalic presentation at birth (primary) Beta stimulant vs placebo | RR 1.68 [1.14, 2.48] | 5 studies · 459 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Cephalic vaginal birth not achieved (CS + breech vaginal birth) primary outcome Beta stimulant vs placebo | RR 0.75 [0.6, 0.92] | 4 studies · 399 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Caesarean section (primary) Beta stimulant vs placebo | RR 0.77 [0.67, 0.88] | 6 studies · 742 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Fetal bradycardia (primary) Beta stimulant vs placebo | RR 2.81 [0.12, 66.17] | 1 study · 58 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Failed external cephalic version Beta stimulant vs placebo | RR 0.7 [0.6, 0.82] | 9 studies · 900 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Perinatal mortality Beta stimulant vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Perinatal morbidity Beta stimulant vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) versus no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) for breech presentation
Population: patients with breech presentation
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cephalic presentation at birth (primary) Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | RR 1.63 [0.75, 3.53] | 3 studies · 279 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Cephalic vaginal birth not achieved (CS + breech vaginal birth) (primary) Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | RR 0.65 [0.47, 0.89] | 1 study · 108 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Caesarean section (primary) Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | RR 0.74 [0.4, 1.37] | 3 studies · 279 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Fetal bradycardia (primary) Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | RR 1.48 [0.62, 3.57] | 2 studies · 210 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Failed external cephalic version Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | RR 0.61 [0.43, 0.86] | 5 studies · 409 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Perinatal morbidity Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Perinatal mortality Regional analgesia (with tocolysis) vs no intervention of regional analgesia (with or without tocolysis) | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |