EC Gynaecology

Change in the frequency and types of anatomically narrow pelvis, as well as anthropometric indicators of pregnant women and large fetus frequencies remain one of the causes of obstetric complications associated with a clinically narrow pelvis. Therefore, the issues of predicting the clinically narrow pelvis before the implementation of obstetric complications did not lose their significance. The purpose of the study was to clarify the value of some prognostic indices in objective prediction of the clinically narrow pelvis. Retrospectively, 125 births were examined, 65 of which ended operationally for clinically narrow pelvis and 60 pregnant women are delivered through the natural birth canal. In all women, the Matveyev and Ershova index was retrospectively determined., Ultrasound pelviometry was carried out with the calculation of the pelviocranial index (PKI). As a result of the study, they came to the conclusion. That the most significant risk factors for a clinically narrow pelvis are a large fetus and incorrect insertion of the fetal head, as well as an anatomically narrow pelvis. In the presence of these risk factors, ultrasound determination of the direct dimensions of the small pelvis should be carried out with the calculation of PKI to predict the clinically narrow pelvis. The normative values of prognostic indices have undergone some changes due to the change in anthropometric indicators of modern pregnancy. So, it is most advisable to consider the indicator-300 as the lower limits of the Matveev index norm, and the Ershova index -5.2%. At If there are risk factors of a clinically narrow pelvis, it is advisable to perform ultrasound pelviometry with the calculation of the pelviocranial index to select the method of delivery.

Keywords: Prediction; Clinically Narrow Pelvis

1. Chernukha EA., et al. Triada-X (2005): 253.
2. VA Kramarsky and IG Zorin. “Ultrasound pelviometry in obstetrics”. Irkutsk: RIO GIUVA (2006).
3. GE Trufanov., et al. “Magnetic resonance pelviometry: diagnosis of the risk of clinically narrow pelvis and shoulder dystocia at the end of the third trimester of pregnancy”. Problems of Women's Health1 (2014): 44-51.
4. Korhonen U., et al. “Fetal pelvic index to predict cephalopelvic disproportion - a retrospective clinical cohort study”. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 6 (2015): 615-621.
5. Malyshkina AI., et al. “Provision of medical care in an anatomically and clinically narrow pelvis, clinical recommendations” (2017): 27.
6. VI Gorbachev., et al. “Review of criminal cases against obstetricians-gynecologists over the past five years under Article 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (causing death by negligence due to improper performance by a person of his professional duties)”. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1 (2021): 5-11.