Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2071427992> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 98 of
98
with 100 items per page.
- W2071427992 endingPage "633" @default.
- W2071427992 startingPage "630" @default.
- W2071427992 abstract "Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate foetal signal quality obtained using an antenatal foetal ECG system (Monica 24™) and compare it with Doppler ultrasound CTG monitoring (Corometrics® 250 series). Material and Methods: Seventy pregnant women (gestational age: between 20 + 0 weeks and 40 + 0 weeks) were examined using the Monica AN24™ system and also underwent Doppler CTG. The signal quality of both methods was compared and correlated with gestational age and pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI). Results: Overall, ECG had a signal quality of 77.4 % and CTG had a signal quality of 73.1 % (p > 0.05). In gestational weeks (GW) 20-26, the signal quality of ECG was significantly better compared to that obtained with CTG (75.5 vs. 45.3 %; p = 0.003), while in GW 27-36, the signal quality was better with CTG (72.3 vs. 83.0 %, p = 0.001). No difference in signal quality was found between the two methods after the 37th GW (87.7 vs. 86.1 %; p > 0.05). CTG showed a statistically significant correlation with BMI (rho 0.25, p < 0.05) while ECG showed no such correlation. Conclusion: The use of non-invasive ECG is particularly indicated in the early weeks of pregnancy, while CTG offers superior results during the vernix period. There was no difference in signal quality after the vernix period. The signal quality with ECG was found to be independent of BMI, while the signal quality of CTG deteriorated with increasing BMI.Einleitung: In dieser Studie soll die Signalqualität einer antepartalen fetalen EKG- (Monica 24™) und CTG-Überwachung (Corometrics® 250 Series) verglichen werden. Material und Methode: Bei 70 Schwangeren, die zwischen der 20 + 0 bis 40 + 0 Schwangerschaftswoche waren, wurde das Monica-AN24™-Überwachungssystem und CTG angeschlossen. Die Signalqualität beider Überwachungsmethoden wurde in Abhängigkeit von Schwangerschaftsalter und Body Mass Index (BMI) verglichen. Ergebnisse: Ingesamt zeigt das EKG eine Signalqualität von 77,4 %, wohingegen das CTG eine Signalqualität von 73,1 % aufwies (p > 0,05). In der 20.–26. Schwangerschaftswoche zeigte das EKG eine statistisch signifikant bessere Signalqualität im Vergleich zum CTG (75,5 vs. 45,3 %, p = 0,003), wohingegen in der 27.–36. SSW das CTG eine bessere Signalqualität zeigte (72,3 vs. 83,0 %, p = 0,001). Ab der 37. SSW konnte kein Unterschied zwischen den Überwachungsmethoden gemessen werden (87,7 vs. 86,1 %, p > 0,05). Das CTG zeigte eine statistisch signifikante Korrelation mit dem BMI (Rho 0,25, p < 0,05), jedoch zeigte sich keine Korrelation beim EKG. Schlussfolgerung: Das nicht invasive EKG ist besonders in den frühen Schwangerschaftswochen indiziert, während in der Vernix-Periode das CTG überlegen ist. Nach der Vernix-Periode zeigt sich kein Unterschied in der Signalqualität. Die EKG-Signalqualität ist BMI-unabhängig, während das CTG bei erhöhtem BMI nur erschwert ableitbar ist." @default.
- W2071427992 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5033074321 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5042626328 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5043587743 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5043839010 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5064606841 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5065285414 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5078084380 @default.
- W2071427992 creator A5085682207 @default.
- W2071427992 date "2012-07-01" @default.
- W2071427992 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
- W2071427992 title "Prenatal Foetal Non-invasive ECG instead of Doppler CTG - A Better Alternative?" @default.
- W2071427992 cites W1969291544 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2010210488 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2034744412 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2046140302 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2068609319 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2081592974 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2082898776 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2091034183 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2101222964 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2126947698 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W2410694958 @default.
- W2071427992 cites W58213803 @default.
- W2071427992 doi "https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1315012" @default.
- W2071427992 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4168322" @default.
- W2071427992 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25278624" @default.
- W2071427992 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
- W2071427992 type Work @default.
- W2071427992 sameAs 2071427992 @default.
- W2071427992 citedByCount "14" @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922013 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922014 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922016 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922018 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922020 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922021 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922022 @default.
- W2071427992 countsByYear W20714279922023 @default.
- W2071427992 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5033074321 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5042626328 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5043587743 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5043839010 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5064606841 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5065285414 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5078084380 @default.
- W2071427992 hasAuthorship W2071427992A5085682207 @default.
- W2071427992 hasBestOaLocation W20714279921 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C117220453 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C131872663 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C2778376644 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C2779234561 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C2988078883 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C3018023364 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C117220453 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C126322002 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C131872663 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C2524010 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C2778376644 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C2779234561 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C2988078883 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C3018023364 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C33923547 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C54355233 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C71924100 @default.
- W2071427992 hasConceptScore W2071427992C86803240 @default.
- W2071427992 hasIssue "07" @default.
- W2071427992 hasLocation W20714279921 @default.
- W2071427992 hasLocation W20714279922 @default.
- W2071427992 hasLocation W20714279923 @default.
- W2071427992 hasLocation W20714279924 @default.
- W2071427992 hasOpenAccess W2071427992 @default.
- W2071427992 hasPrimaryLocation W20714279921 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2109994796 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2273956082 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2333891256 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2401739700 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2413530964 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2558155956 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2614365095 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W2902115400 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W3049187542 @default.
- W2071427992 hasRelatedWork W3187277275 @default.
- W2071427992 hasVolume "72" @default.
- W2071427992 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2071427992 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2071427992 magId "2071427992" @default.
- W2071427992 workType "article" @default.