Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 146

1.

[Elastography of cervix to predict delay from induction to delivery].

Sonnier L, Bouhanna P, Arnou C, Rozenberg P.

Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2014 Dec;42(12):827-31. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.10.005. Epub 2014 Nov 13. French.

PMID:
25458805
2.
4.

Transvaginal sonography of the uterine cervix prior to labor induction.

Gabriel R, Darnaud T, Chalot F, Gonzalez N, Leymarie F, Quereux C.

Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Mar;19(3):254-7.

5.

Usefulness of elastography in predicting the outcome of Foley catheter labour induction.

Wozniak S, Czuczwar P, Szkodziak P, Paszkowski T.

Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2015 Jun;55(3):245-50. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12331. Epub 2015 Jun 5.

PMID:
26044410
6.

Diagnostic accuracy of cervical elastography in predicting labor induction success: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Londero AP, Schmitz R, Bertozzi S, Driul L, Fruscalzo A.

J Perinat Med. 2016 Mar;44(2):167-78. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2015-0035. Review.

PMID:
26011923
7.

Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful labor induction.

Ware V, Raynor BD.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 May;182(5):1030-2.

PMID:
10819818
8.

Elastography of the uterine cervix: implications for success of induction of labor.

Swiatkowska-Freund M, Preis K.

Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jul;38(1):52-6. doi: 10.1002/uog.9021.

9.

Predicting factors on cervical ripening and response to induction in women pregnant over 37 weeks.

Bahadori F, Ayatollahi H, Naghavi-Behzad M, Khalkhali H, Naseri Z.

Med Ultrason. 2013 Sep;15(3):191-8.

10.

Successful induction of labor: prediction by preinduction cervical length, angle of progression and cervical elastography.

Pereira S, Frick AP, Poon LC, Zamprakou A, Nicolaides KH.

Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Oct;44(4):468-75. doi: 10.1002/uog.13411. Epub 2014 Aug 19.

11.

[Elastography in the examination of the uterine cervix before labor induction].

Preis K, Swiatkowska-Freund M, Pankrac Z.

Ginekol Pol. 2010 Oct;81(10):757-61. Polish.

PMID:
21117304
12.

Preinduction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labor.

Pandis GK, Papageorghiou AT, Ramanathan VG, Thompson MO, Nicolaides KH.

Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;18(6):623-8.

13.

Quantitative elastography of the cervix for predicting labor induction success.

Fruscalzo A, Londero AP, Fröhlich C, Meyer-Wittkopf M, Schmitz R.

Ultraschall Med. 2015 Feb;36(1):65-73. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1355572. Epub 2014 Feb 20.

14.
15.

Randomized trial of two doses of the prostaglandin E1 analog misoprostol for labor induction.

Farah LA, Sanchez-Ramos L, Rosa C, Del Valle GO, Gaudier FL, Delke I, Kaunitz AM.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Aug;177(2):364-9; discussion 369-71.

PMID:
9290452
16.
17.

A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.

Hill JB, Thigpen BD, Bofill JA, Magann E, Moore LE, Martin JN Jr.

Am J Perinatol. 2009 Jan;26(1):33-8. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1091396. Epub 2008 Oct 10.

PMID:
18850516
18.

Effect of vaginal pH on efficacy of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.

Ramsey PS, Ogburn PL Jr, Harris DY, Heise RH, Ramin KD.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Jun;182(6):1616-9.

PMID:
10871486
19.

[Transvaginal ultrasound assessment of the cervix and digital examination before labor induction].

Gomes F, Ramalho C, Machado AP, Calado E, Cardoso F, Montenegro N.

Acta Med Port. 2006 Mar-Apr;19(2):109-14. Epub 2006 Aug 18. Portuguese.

20.

Bishop score and the outcome of labor induction with misoprostol.

Szczesny W, Kjøllesdal M, Karlsson B, Nielsen S.

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(5):579-82.

PMID:
16752237

Supplemental Content

Support Center