瘢痕子宫再次妊娠足月后不同分娩方式的临床结局
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

基金项目:


Clinical observation about labor modalities for secondary pregnancy of women with cicatricial uterus
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
    摘要:

    【摘要】目的 探讨瘢痕子宫再次妊娠足月后不同分娩方式的临床结局,为其合理选择分娩方式提供依据。方法 回顾性分析本院2014年10月~2016年12月113例有剖宫产史孕妇不同分娩方式的临床资料,经阴道分娩者48例设为A组,经阴道试产失败后转剖宫产者19例设为B组,剖宫产46例设为C组,另选取同期非瘢痕子宫再次妊娠阴道分娩51例设为D组,对比分析四组分娩出血量、住院时间、产褥热发生率、新生儿一般情况、Apgar评分等。结果 瘢痕子宫再次妊娠经阴道分娩成功率为466%(48/113),入院时宫颈容受程度越高(宫颈长度越短)、子宫前壁肌层厚度测值越大,经阴道分娩成功率越高。A组产时或术中出血量、平均住院日与D组相比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);B、C组出血量、平均住院日与A组比较显著增加(P<0.01);四组产褥热发病率、新生儿一般情况、Apgar评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 以严格监控临床风险为前提,瘢痕子宫再次妊娠经阴道分娩在出血、住院日等方面优于剖宫产,具有一定可行性。

    Abstract:

    【Abstract】 Objective To study the clinical outcomes of different delivery modes for secondary pregnancy of women with cicatricial uterus, and provide the basis for the reasonable choice of delivery mode. Methods 113 cases of clinical data of cesarean section in pregnant women with different delivery modes in our hospital form October 2014 to December 2016 were divided into vaginal delivery group (group A, 48 cases), vaginal delivery failure after cesarean section group (group B, 19 cases) and cesarean section group (C group, 46 cases), the other selected non uterine scar pregnancy vaginal delivery group (group D, 51 cases). The child birth bleeding, hospitalization time, the incidence of puerperal fever, and neonatal Apgar score were observed. Results The results of uterine scar pregnancy vaginal delivery success rate was 466% (48/113). The higher the degree of cervical receptivity at admission (cervical length) and anterior uterine wall muscle layer thickness value, the higher the success rate of vaginal delivery was. There was no significant difference between group A and D in the amount of blood loss during labor or during operation and the average hospital stay. Compared with group A, blood loss and average hospital stay in group B and C were significantly increased (P<0.01). Compared with A group, B group, C group and D group had no significant difference (P>0.05) in the incidence of puerperal fever, neonatal general situation and Apgar score. Conclusion On the premise of strict monitoring of clinical risk, to some extent, vaginal delivery of scar uterus is better than cesarean section in vaginal bleeding and hospitalization days.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2019-05-23
您是第位访问者
版权所有:《西部医学》编辑部     蜀ICP备18038379号-4
地址:四川省成都市武侯区小天竺街75号财富国际18F-1号    邮政编码:610041
电话:028-85570072/85588403    E-mail:xbyxqk@163.com
技术支持:北京勤云科技发展有限公司