title: Use of Non-invasive Uterine Electromyography in the Diagnosis of Preterm Labour.
abstract: Predictive values of methods currently used in the clinics to diagnose preterm labour are low. This leads to missed opportunities to improve neonatal outcomes and, on the other hand, to unnecessary hospitalizations and treatments. In addition, research of new and potentially more effective preterm labour treatments is hindered by the inability to include only patients in true preterm labour into studies. Uterine electromyography (EMG) detects changes in cell excitability and coupling required for labour and has higher predictive values for preterm delivery than currently available methods. This methodology could also provide a better means to evaluate various therapeutic interventions for preterm labour. Our manuscript presents a review of uterine EMG studies examining the potential clinical value that this technology possesses over what is available to physicians currently. We also evaluated the impact that uterine EMG could have on investigation of preterm labour treatments by calculating sample sizes for studies using EMG vs. current methods to enrol women. Besides helping clinicians to make safer and more cost-effective decisions when managing patients with preterm contractions, implementation of uterine EMG for diagnosis of preterm labour would also greatly reduce sample sizes required for studies of treatments.
authors.affiliation: St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Downtown Campus at TGen 445 N 5th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Lucovnik
authors.affiliation: St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Downtown Campus at TGen 445 N 5th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
authors.forename: Z
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Novak-Antolic
authors.affiliation: St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Downtown Campus at TGen 445 N 5th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
authors.forename: R E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Garfield
keywords: Cervical length; preterm birth; preterm delivery; preterm labour; tocodynamometry; uterine electromyography
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2002 Jan 24;346(4):250-5
references.pmid: 11807149
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Apr;192(4):1325-9; discussion 1329-30
references.pmid: 15846230
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Feb;178(2):346-54
references.pmid: 9500498
references.citation: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2010 Sep;57(9):2178-87
references.pmid: 20460202
references.citation: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2007 Jun 01;7 Suppl 1:S5
references.pmid: 17570165
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Nov;94(5 Pt 2):869-77
references.pmid: 10546776
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984 Nov 15;150(6):734-41
references.pmid: 6093538
references.citation: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Apr;25(4):353-6
references.pmid: 15736212
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Jun;101(6):1254-60
references.pmid: 12798533
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Oct;100(4):813-26
references.pmid: 12383554
references.citation: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2007 Jun 01;7 Suppl 1:S10
references.pmid: 17570154
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Dec;169(6):1636-53
references.pmid: 8267082
references.citation: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1999 Oct;46(10):1222-9
references.pmid: 10513127
references.citation: Ann Biomed Eng. 2007 Mar;35(3):465-73
references.pmid: 17226089
references.citation: Am J Physiol. 1995 Oct;269(4 Pt 1):C1008-17
references.pmid: 7485440
references.citation: Hum Reprod Update. 1998 Sep-Oct;4(5):673-95
references.pmid: 10027621
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Oct;171(4):956-64
references.pmid: 7943109
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Apr;178(4):811-22
references.pmid: 9579450
references.citation: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2004 May;15(5):297-301
references.pmid: 15280119
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Feb;174(2):744-53
references.pmid: 8623816
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993 May;168(5):1609-15
references.pmid: 8388630
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Jul;90(1):102-11
references.pmid: 9207823
references.citation: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jan;23(1):42-5
references.pmid: 14970998
references.citation: Early Hum Dev. 1999 Jan;53(3):193-218
references.pmid: 10088988
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 May;180(5):1169-76
references.pmid: 10329873
references.citation: BMJ. 2002 Aug 10;325(7359):301
references.pmid: 12169504
references.citation: Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007 Oct;21(5):857-68
references.pmid: 17459777
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1996 Feb 29;334(9):567-72
references.pmid: 8569824
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Aug;163(2):648-54
references.pmid: 2386157
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Feb;101(2):402-12
references.pmid: 12576267
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Feb;79(2):214-8
references.pmid: 1731287
references.citation: Oxf Rev Reprod Biol. 1988;10:436-90
references.pmid: 3072507
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Jul;177(1):13-8
references.pmid: 9240576
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;204(3):228.e1-10
references.pmid: 21145033
references.citation: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl. 1979;90:1-61
references.pmid: 290124