Advertisement

Shoulder Dystocia

  • Madhu Nagpal
Chapter

Abstract

It is a real intrapartum emergency defined as difficulty in delivery of shoulders and trunk after head has come out of introitus with a delay by more than 60 s and further requiring certain maneuvers. The incidence is related to some macrosomic babies of diabetic or nondiabetic mothers weighing 4–4.5 kg or more. Some postmature babies may have it.

The incidence in general is 0.2–1.75 %. In many situations, it has been under or over reported as figures are derived from labor room records. To know its real incidence, standardized criteria for registry have been defined.

The management aim is to reduce head to body delivery time in order to release cord compression early and to avoid fetal and maternal injury due to aggressive manipulations.

No single maneuver is superior to others in releasing impacted shoulder and reducing risk of injury. When diagnosed, shoulder dystocia drill is recommended. McRoberts’ maneuver with suprapubic pressure is a preferred initial approach.

Maternal morbidity is due to lacerations of genital tract, extension of episiotomy, and rupture uterus. There may occur postpartum hemorrhage due to uterine atony, prolonged labor, large infant, and increased blood loss from vaginal tears. Fetal injuries of neuromusculoskeletal type cause morbidity and mortality. About 11 % neonates suffer from serious neonatal trauma.

Mostly shoulder dystocia is neither accurately predicted nor prevented. Elective induction of labor or elective cesarean section for all macrosomic babies is not appropriate. Elective cesarean is indicated for estimated fetal weight 5000 g (4500 g in Indians) in nondiabetic and 4500 g (4000 g in Indians) in diabetes mellitus. Counseling and documentation of events save from the medicolegal problems.

Keywords

Fetal Weight Brachial Plexus Injury Shoulder Dystocia Uterine Atony Posterior Shoulder 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Acker DB. Risk factors for shoulder dystocia in the average weight infant. Obstet Gynecol. 1986;67:614.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ACOG 1997. Shoulder dystocia ACOG practice bulletin Washington DC.1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Shoulder dystocia practice bulletin No. 40. 2002. Reaffirmed 2012b.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gherman RB. Analysis of McRobert’s maneuver by x-ray pelvimetry. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gross SJ. Shoulder dystocia: predictors and outcome: a five year review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;156:334.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Johnson et al. Shoulder Dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 1987;156:441Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mackenzie IZ. Management of shoulder dystocia: trends in incidence and maternal and neonatal morbidity. Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;110(5):1059.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mehta MH. Shoulder dystocia and the next delivery: outcomes and management. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2007;20(10):729.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spellacy et al. Macrosomia- maternal characteristics and infant complications. Obstetrics Gynaecology 1985;66:158.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Woods CE. A principle of physics is applicable to shoulder delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1943;45:796.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wood et al. Time an important variable in normal delivery . J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw.1973;80:295.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SGRD IMS & R.AmritsarIndia

Personalised recommendations