The effect of clamped and unclamped umbilical cord samples on blood gas analysis.
Acid–base equilibrium
Blood gas analysis
Cord clamping
Umbilical cord
Journal
Archives of gynecology and obstetrics
ISSN: 1432-0711
Titre abrégé: Arch Gynecol Obstet
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8710213
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2021
12 2021
Historique:
received:
16
09
2020
accepted:
16
04
2021
pubmed:
23
5
2021
medline:
26
11
2021
entrez:
22
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Delayed cord clamping for at least 60 s is recommended to improve neonatal outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether there are differences in cord BGA between samples collected after double clamping the cord or without clamping the cord, when blood collection occurs within 60 s from birth in both groups. A cross-sectional study was carried out, collecting data from 6884 high-risk women who were divided into two groups based on the method of cord sampling (clamped vs unclamped). There were significant decrease in pH and BE values into unclamped group compared with the clamped group. This difference remained significant when considering pathological blood gas analysis parameters, with a higher percentage of pathological pH or BE values in the unclamped group. Samples from the unclamped cord alter the acid-base parameters compared to collection from the clamped cord; however, this difference does not appear to be of clinical relevance. Findings could be due to the large sample size, which allowed to achieve a high power and to investigate very small numerical changes between groups, leading to a statistically significant difference in pH and BE between samples even when we could not appreciate any clinical relevant difference of pH or BE between groups. When blood gas analysis is indicated, the priority should be given to the timing of blood collection to allow reliable results, to assess newborns status at birth and intervene when needed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34021806
doi: 10.1007/s00404-021-06076-w
pii: 10.1007/s00404-021-06076-w
pmc: PMC8553729
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1493-1499Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Dec;97(12):1533
pubmed: 30132787
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011 May;283(5):1011-4
pubmed: 20499075
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015 Oct;131(1):5-8
pubmed: 26433399
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Sep;175(3 Pt 1):517-22
pubmed: 8828408
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Jan;97(1):7-12
pubmed: 28921502
Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Sep;102(3):628-36
pubmed: 12962954
Early Hum Dev. 2014 Sep;90(9):523-5
pubmed: 24786384
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jan;129(1):1
pubmed: 28002310
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Apr;123(4):896-901
pubmed: 24785633
J Paediatr Child Health. 1997 Aug;33(4):308-10
pubmed: 9323618
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007 Nov;92(6):F430-4
pubmed: 17951550
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Mar;135(3):576-582
pubmed: 32028488
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2000 Jan-Feb;45(1):58-66
pubmed: 10772736
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012 May;162(1):21-3
pubmed: 22405491
BJOG. 2008 May;115(6):697-703
pubmed: 18410652
Biol Neonate. 1972;20(5):458-65
pubmed: 4644773
Evid Based Child Health. 2014 Jun;9(2):303-97
pubmed: 25404605
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013 May;92(5):567-74
pubmed: 22913332
Evid Based Child Health. 2014 Jun;9(2):398-400
pubmed: 25404606