Articles Vol. 67 No. 6 25/06/2026

STUDY OF CLINICAL AND PARACLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND MODE OF DELIVERY IN CASES OF NUCHAL CORD

Luu Hien Minh1,2, Nguyen Van Lam3,4, Tran Thi Truc Van5,6
1 Viet Anh Multispeialty Clinic
2 Phòng khám Đa khoa Việt Anh
3 Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy
4 Trường Đại học Y Dược Cần Thơ
5 Military Hospital 121
6 Bệnh viện Quân y 121
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67i6.5495
19 Views
7 Downloads
Abstract

Objectives: This study investigates the clinical and paraclinical characteristics and methods of pregnancy termination in cases of nuchal cord entanglement.

Subjects and methods: Descriptive cross-sectional study. Pregnant women meeting the criteria in the study sample.

Results: The average age of the study group was 27.75 ± 6.78 years, ranging from 18 to 44 years. The majority lived in urban areas with 72.37%, while 27.63% lived in rural areas. There were 42.5% with umbilical cord entanglement around the neck. 82.3% had umbilical cord entanglement once, and 7.5% had umbilical cord entanglement twice. The average umbilical cord length in the study was 50.40 ± 3.53 cm, with the shortest 40 cm and the longest 58 cm. Obstetric monitoring in group 1 accounted for a high percentage (95%). The rate of cesarean section in the study group was higher than in the vaginal delivery group (51.25% vs. 48.75%). For umbilical cord entanglement once, the rate of vaginal delivery was higher than that of cesarean section. In cases where the umbilical cord is wrapped around the neck twice, the cesarean section rate is higher.

Conclusion: A high frequency of nuchal cord was observed in the study population.

References
[1]
Vasa R, Dimitrov R, Patel S. Nuchal cord at delivery and perinatal outcomes: single-center retrospective study, with emphasis on fetal acid-base balance. Pediatr Neonatol, 2018, 59 (5): 439-447. doi: 10.1016/j.pedneo.2018.03.002 Google Scholar
[2]
Sherer D.M, Ward K, Bennett M, Dalloul M. Current perspectives of prenatal sonographic diagnosis and clinical management challenges of nuchal cord(s). Int J Womens Health, 2020 (12): 613-631. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S211124 Google Scholar
[3]
Tariq S, Riffat S, Amin S et al. Incidence of nuchal cord and its effect on mode of delivery and fetal outcome. Prof Med J, 2025, 32 (9): 1142-1148. doi: 10.29309/TPMJ/2025.32.09.9110 Google Scholar
[4]
Majeed B, Arya J, Gupta T. Incidence of nuchal cord and its impact on labor progression and neonatal outcomes: a prospective observational study. Int J Life Sci Biotechnol Pharma Res, 2025, 14 (2): 19-23. doi: 10.69605/ijlbpr_14.2.2025.5 Google Scholar
[5]
Awowole I.O, Badejoko O.O, Adeniyi O.A et al. Cord length, umbilical artery lactate concentration and perinatal outcomes of babies with nuchal cord at Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Ann Health Res, 2023, 9 (1): 60-68. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ahr/article/view/244559 Google Scholar
[6]
Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Nhung, Trịnh Trần Xuân Vinh, Nguyễn Thị Yến và cộng sự. Biểu đồ tim thai loại II trong chuyển dạ: kết cục thai kỳ và mô hình dự đoán trẻ ngạt. Tạp chí Phụ Sản, 2023, 21 (2):78-83. doi: 10.46755/vjog.2023.2.1603 Google Scholar
[7]
Nguyễn Ngọc Rạng, Trương Kim Thuyên. Dây rốn quấn cổ lúc sinh và kết cục trên thai nhi tại Bệnh viện Sản Nhi An Giang. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 2021, 498 (2): 22-25. doi: 10.51298/vmj.v498i2.163 Google Scholar
[8]
Silva G.V, Gontijo C.T, Lunguinho L et al. Perinatal outcomes related to the presence of a nuchal cord during delivery: a retrospective cohort study. Diagnostics (Basel), 2025, 15 (10): 1197. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15101197 Google Scholar
[9]
Xiao Y.J, Chen Y.H, Zheng H.Y et al. Standardized ultrasound diagnosis of nuchal cord. Int J Gen Med, 2021, 14: 5825-5834. doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S322713 Google Scholar
[10]
Sugimoto M, Nakao M, Nii M et al. Intrapartum fetal heart rate pattern evolution associated with septuple nuchal cord loops: a case report. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol, 2025: 9925453. doi: 10.1155/crog/9925453 Google Scholar
[11]
Meena P, Bhojwani P, Verma G.S. Effects of nuchal cord on fetomaternal outcome: an obstetrician challenge. Int J Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2018, 2 (5): 19-23. https://www.gynaecologyjournal.com/articles/124/2-5-7-506.pdf Google Scholar