Ultrasound Examination for Infants Born Breech by Elective Cesarean Section With a Normal Hip Exam for Instability.

INTRODUCTION: Because of the risk of developmental dysplasia of the hip in infants born breech-despite a normal physical exam-the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines recommend ultrasound (US) hip imaging at 6 weeks of age for breech females and optional imaging for breech males. The purpose of this study is to report US results and follow-up of infants born breech with a normal physical exam. METHODS: The electronic medical record for children born at 1 hospital from 2008 to 2011 was reviewed. Data were analyzed for sex, birth weight, breech position, birth order, ethnicity, US and x-ray results, follow-up, and cost. RESULTS: A total of 237 infants were born breech with a normal physical examination, all delivered by cesarean section. Of the infants, 55% were male and 45% female. About 151 breech infants (64%) with a normal Barlow and Ortolani exam had a precautionary hip US as recommended by the AAP performed at an average of 7 weeks of age. Eighty-six breech infants (35%) did not have an US and were followed clinically. Of the 151 infants that had an US, 140 (93%) were read as normal. None had a dislocated hip. Two patients had a normal physical exam but laxity on US. These 2 patients were the only infants treated in a Pavlik harness. A pediatric orthopaedic surgeon followed those with subtle US findings and no laxity until normal. CONCLUSIONS: The decision by the AAP to recommend US screening at 6 weeks of age for infants with a normal physical exam but breech position was based on an extensive literature review and expert opinion. Not all pediatricians are following the AAP guidelines. The decision to perform an US should be done on a case-by-case basis by the examining physician. A more practical, cost-effective strategy would be to skip the US if the physical exam is normal and simply obtain an AP pelvis x-ray at 4 months. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-this is a case-control study investigating the outcomes of infants on data drawn from the electronic medical record.

Indicações de cesariana baseadas em evidências: parte I / Evidence-based cesarean section indications: part I

No Brasil, as taxas de cesárea variam bastante entre as regiões, principalmente quando se compara a assistência realizada pelo Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) com a assistência privada. A taxa de cesarianas no setor de saúde suplementar chega próximo de 80%, enquanto no SUS fica próxima de 30%, muito acima do recomendado pela Organização Mundial de Saude (OMS). Realizou-se uma revisão da literatura em busca das melhores evidências disponíveis sobre indicações de cesariana. Analisaram-se as principais indicações de cesárea, como distocia ou falha na progressão do parto, desproporção cefalopélvica, má posição fetal nas variedades de posição posteriores e transversas persistentes, apresentação pélvica, de face e córmica, cesárea anterior, frequência cardíaca fetal não-tranquilizadora, presença de mecônio e centralização fetal. Em nenhuma dessas situações existe indicação absoluta de cesariana, uma vez que mesmo na apresentação córmica o parto normal pode ser tentado, mediante versão cefálica externa (VCE). Nas distocias de progressão, o parto normal pode ser alcançado mediante correção da contratilidade uterina, porém a cesariana encontra-se indicada quando a desproporção cefalopélvica é diagnosticada pelo uso judicioso do partograma. A apresentação pélvica também pode ser corrigida com VCE a termo, mas a via de parto deve ser discutida com a gestante quando a VCE falha ou não é realizada. Embora os riscos relativos neonatais sejam maiores para o parto vaginal, os riscos absolutos são baixos, e a opinião da gestante deve ser considerada

Rates of cesarean in Brazil vary widely among the regions, especially when Single Health System (SUS, acronym in Portuguese) assistance is compared with private clinics. In the supplementary health system the rates of cesarean section are around 80% and in SUS are about 30%, above the rates recommended by World Health Organization (WHO). A literature review was performed searching the best evaluable evidences. The main indications for cesarean section were considered such as dystocia or failure to progress, cephalopelvic disproportion, abnormal fetal positioning in occiput posterior and transverse presentations, breech, face and transverse lie, previous cesarean section, non-reassuring fetal heart rate, meconium and brain-sparing effect. Most of these situations do not represent absolute indications for cesarean section. Even in transverse lie an external cephalic version (ECV) could be tried and a trial of labor can be conducted. When a progress failure occurs, vaginal delivery can be achieved using measures as correction of contractility disorders, although cesarean should be indicated when cephalopelvic disproportion is diagnosed using correctly the partograma. Breech presentation can also be corrected with an ECV at term but the mode of delivery has to be discussed with the patient when ECV fails or it is not performed. Although neonatal relative risks are higher with vaginal delivery, absolute risks are small, and the pregnant women opinion has to be considered