What process is taking place when the fetal skull bones overlap when passing through the birth canal in vertex presentation?

Ball JW, Dains JE, Flynn JA, Solomon BS, Stewart RW. Head and neck. In: Ball JW, Dains JE, Flynn JA, Solomon BS, Stewart RW, eds. Siedel's Guide to Physical Examination. 9th ed. St Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2019:chap 1.

Jones KL, Jones MC, Campo MD. Craniosynostosis syndromes. In: Jones KL, Jones MC, Campo MD, eds. Smith's Recognizable Patterns of Human Deformation. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2022:570-599.

Lissauer T, Hansen A. Physical examination of the newborn. In: Martin RJ, Fanaroff AA, Walsh MC, eds. Fanaroff and Martin's Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine. 11th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2020:chap 28.

Walker VP. Newborn evaluation. In: Gleason CA, Juul SE, eds. Avery's Diseases of the Newborn. 10th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2018:chap 25.

Page 2

An infant's skull is made up of 6 separate cranial (skull) bones:

• Frontal bone
• Occipital bone
• Two parietal bones
• Two temporal bones

These bones are held together by strong, fibrous, elastic tissues called sutures.

The spaces between the bones that remain open in babies and young children are called fontanelles. Sometimes, they are called soft spots. These spaces are a part of normal development. The cranial bones remain separate for about 12 to 18 months. They then grow together as part of normal growth. They stay connected throughout adulthood.

Two fontanelles usually are present on a newborn's skull:

• On the top of the middle head, just forward of center (anterior fontanelle)
• In the back of the middle of the head (posterior fontanelle)

The posterior fontanelle usually closes by age 1 or 2 months. It may already be closed at birth.

The anterior fontanelle usually closes sometime between 9 months and 18 months.

The sutures and fontanelles are needed for the infant's brain growth and development. During childbirth, the flexibility of the sutures allows the bones to overlap so the baby's head can pass through the birth canal without pressing on and damaging their brain.

During infancy and childhood, the sutures are flexible. This allows the brain to grow quickly and protects the brain from minor impacts to the head (such as when the infant is learning to hold his head up, roll over, and sit up). Without flexible sutures and fontanelles, the child's brain could not grow enough. The child would develop brain damage.

Feeling the cranial sutures and fontanelles is one way that health care providers follow the child's growth and development. They are able to assess the pressure inside the brain by feeling the tension of the fontanelles. The fontanelles should feel flat and firm. Bulging fontanelles may be a sign of increased pressure within the brain. In this case, providers may need to use imaging techniques to see the brain structure, such as CT scan or MRI scan. Surgery may be needed to relieve the increased pressure.

Sunken, depressed fontanelles are sometimes a sign of dehydration.

1

Jukic, AM, Baird, DD, Weinberg, CR, McConnaughey, DR, Wilcox, AJ. Length of human pregnancy and contributors to its natural variation. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(10): 2848–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

2

Lovejoy, CO.The natural history of human gait and posture in Part 1: spine and pelvis. Gait and Posture. 2005;21: 95–112.Google ScholarPubMed

3

Mac-Thiong, JM, Berthonnaud, E, Dimar, JR, Bets, RR, Labelle, H. Sagittal alignment of the spine and pelvis during growth. Spine. 2004;29: 1642–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

4

Caldwell, WE, Moloy, HC. Anatomical variation in the female pelvis and their effect in labor with a suggested classification. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1933;26: 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6

Pu, F, Xu, L, Li, D, et al. Effect of different labour forces on fetal skull moulding. Med Eng Phys. 2011;33(5): 620–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Operative vaginal delivery. Green-top Guideline No. 26. London: RCOG Press; 2011.

8

Shynlova, O, Kwong, R, Lye, SJ. Mechanical stretch regulates hypertrophic phenotype of the myometrium during pregnancy. Reproduction. 2010;139(1): 247–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

9

10

Palmer, SK, Zamudio, S, Coffin, C, et al. Quantitative estimation of human uterine artery blood flow and pelvic blood flow redistribution in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;80: 1000–6.Google ScholarPubMed

11

Word, RA, Stull, JT, Casey, ML, Kamm, KE. Contractile elements and myosin light chain phosphorylation in myometrial tissue from nonpregnant and pregnant women. J Clin Invest. 1993;92(1): 29–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

12

Hicks, JB. On the contractions of the uterus throughout pregnancy: their physiological effects and their value in the diagnosis of pregnancy. Transactions of the Obstetrical Society of London. 1871;13: 216–31.Google Scholar

13

McLean, M, Bisits, A, Davies, J, et al. A placental clock controlling the length of human pregnancy. Nat Med. 1995;1: 460–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

15

Moore, S, Ide, M, Randhawa, M, et al. An investigation into the association among preterm birth, cytokine gene polymorphisms and periodontal disease. BJOG. 2004;111: 125–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

16

Mendelson, CR. Fetal–maternal hormonal signalling in pregnancy and labour. Mol Endocrinol. 2009;23: 947–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Small-for-gestational-age fetus, investigation and management. Green-top Guideline No. 31. London: RCOG Press; 2002.

18

Morse, K, Williams, A, Gardosi, J. Fetal growth screening by fundal height measurement. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 23;2009: 809–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

19

Weekes, ARL, Flynn, MJ. Engagement of the fetal head in primigravidae and its relationship to duration of gestation and time of onset to labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1975;82: 7–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

20

Muhunthan, K, Abarna, K, Peratheepa, V, Shampika, R. A descriptive study on relationship between engagement of fetal head and selected maternal and fetal parameters among pregnancies in University Obstetric Unit, Teaching Hospital, Jaffna. FIGO-SAFOG-SLCOG scientific conference. Sri Lanka J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;36(suppl. 1): 20–1.Google Scholar

21

Ann, AFR. Predictors of vaginal delivery in nulliparous mothers. Med. 2014;13(1): 35–40. doi: 10.4103/1596-3519.126949.Google Scholar

24

Katherine Laughon, S, Zhang, J, Troendle, J, Sun, L, Reddy, UM. Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(4): 805–11.Google Scholar

25

Huber, A, Hudelist, G, Czerwenka, K, et al. Gene expression profiling of cervical tissue during physiological cervical effacement. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105: 91–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

26

Read, CP, Word, RA, Ruscheinsky, MA, Timmons, BC, Mahendroo, MS. Cervical remodeling during pregnancy and parturition: molecular characterization of the softening phase in mice. Reproduction. 2007;134: 327–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

27

28

Duignan, NM, Studd, JW, Hughes, AO. Characteristics of normal labour in different racial groups. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1975;82(8): 593–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

29

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Intrapartum Care: Care of Healthy Women and their Babies during Childbirth. London: NICE; 2007.

30

Buhimschi, CS, Buhimschi, IA, Malinow, AM, et al. Pushing in labor: performance and not endurance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(6): 1339–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31

Prins, M, Boxem, J, Lucas, C, Huttona, E. Effect of spontaneous pushing versus Valsalva pushing in the second stage of labour on mother and fetus: a systematic review of randomized trials. BJOG. 2011;118(6): 662–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar