Table 1 Obstetrical analysis of the finite element simulations of the fetopelvic dyads.
From: Dynamic finite-element simulations reveal early origin of complex human birth pattern
Pelvic reconstruction | Pelvic inlet area [cm2] | Pelvic inlet AP [mm] | Pelvic inlet TV [mm] | Neonatal brain size [grams] | Delivery outcome of bony simulations | Level of arrest | Nutation [mm]a | Cephalo-pelvic gap at inlet [mm] | Delivery outcome taking soft tissue into account |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A.L. 288-1, Lovejoy et al.29 | 79 | 72.4 | 128 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 20 | 3.9 | Dystocic |
145 | Dystocic | Inlet | – | 0.9 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Inlet | – | 0.0 | Dystocic | ||||
A.L. 288-1,Tague and Lovejoy18 | 83 | 76 | 132 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 20 | 5.5 | Dystocic |
145 | Eutocic | – | 20 | 3.0 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Inlet | – | 0.2 | Dystocic | ||||
A.L. 288-1, Haeusler and Schmid19 | 86 | 81 | 123 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 12 | 7.5 | Eutocic |
145 | Eutocic | – | 12 | 4.5 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Inlet | – | 2.1 | Dystocic | ||||
A.L. 288-1, Brassey et al.20 | 79 | 80 | 128.5 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 0 | 7.0 | Eutocic |
145 | Eutocic | – | 6 | 4.3 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Inlet | – | 0.5 | Dystocic | ||||
Sts 14, Haeusler and Schmid19 | 72 | 89 | 101 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 11 | 7.6 | Eutocic |
145 | Eutocic | – | 11 | 5.9 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Midplane | – | 3.4 | Dystocic | ||||
Sts 14, Berge and Goularas17 | 77 | 83 | 116.8 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 20 | 8.6 | Eutocic |
145 | Eutocic | – | 20 | 6.2 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Midplane | – | 2.7 | Dystocic | ||||
87 | 81.7 | 117.6 | 110 | Eutocic | – | 8 | 8.0 | Eutocic | |
145 | Eutocic | – | 13 | 5.1 | Dystocic | ||||
180 | Dystocic | Inlet | – | 2.0 | Dystocic | ||||
Modern human female | 116.1 | 136.1 | 368 | Eutocic | – | 4 | 11.3 | Eutocic |
