ScholarLens Back to search
2010•Journal of Perinatal MedicineOpen access

Atosiban vs. ritodrine as a tocolytic in external cephalic version at term: a prospective cohort study

Jorge Burgos, Nekane Eguiguren, Eider Quintana, Patricia Cobos, María del Mar Centeno, Rosa Larrieta, Luis Fernández‐Llebrez

Open full text 11 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) at term using ritodrine or atosiban as a tocolytic agent. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with a sample of 236 pregnant women with a breech presentation at term, from November 2006 to March 2008. Data have been analyzed from the moment the cephalic version is performed until the time of delivery. RESULTS: ECV success rate using ritodrine as a tocolytic agent was 56.8% compared to 31.4% with atosiban. Ritodrine increases the version success potential more significantly than atosiban (P<0.05). In both cases, the use of ECV reduced the rate of cesarean sections, although a higher number of versions are required with atosiban [numbers needed to treat (NNT)=9.08] to avoid a cesarean section compared to ritodrine (NNT=3.41). CONCLUSIONS: Ritodrine seems better than atosiban as tocolytic agent for ECVs.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) at term using ritodrine or atosiban as a tocolytic agent. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with a sample of 236 pregnant women with a breech presentation at term, from November 2006 to March 2008. Data have been analyzed from the moment the cephalic version is performed until the time of delivery. RESULTS: ECV success rate using ritodrine as a tocolytic agent was 56.8% compared to 31.4% with atosiban. Ritodrine increases the version success potential more significantly than atosiban (P<0.05). In both cases, the use of ECV reduced the rate of cesarean sections, although a higher number of versions are required with atosiban [numbers needed to treat (NNT)=9.08] to avoid a cesarean section compared to ritodrine (NNT=3.41). CONCLUSIONS: Ritodrine seems better than atosiban as tocolytic agent for ECVs.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) at term using ritodrine or atosiban as a tocolytic agent. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with a sample of 236 pregnant women with a breech presentation at term, from November 2006 to March 2008. Data have been analyzed from the moment the cephalic version is performed until the time of delivery. RESULTS: ECV success rate using ritodrine as a tocolytic agent was 56.8% compared to 31.4% with atosiban. Ritodrine increases the version success potential more significantly than atosiban (P<0.05). In both cases, the use of ECV reduced the rate of cesarean sections, although a higher number of versions are required with atosiban [numbers needed to treat (NNT)=9.08] to avoid a cesarean section compared to ritodrine (NNT=3.41). CONCLUSIONS: Ritodrine seems better than atosiban as tocolytic agent for ECVs.

Key concepts: Ritodrine, Medicine, Tocolytic agent, Tocolytic, External cephalic version, Anesthesia, Prospective cohort study, Term (time)

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Atosiban vs. ritodrine as a tocolytic in external cephalic version at term: a prospective cohort study — Research Paper | ScholarLens