马晓娟, 王晶, 南延荣. 单中心5年2 423例剖宫产后妊娠分娩方式分析[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2018, 39(7): 578-580,605. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.07.008
引用本文: 马晓娟, 王晶, 南延荣. 单中心5年2 423例剖宫产后妊娠分娩方式分析[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2018, 39(7): 578-580,605. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.07.008
MA Xiaojuan, WANG Jing, NAN Yanrong. Elective repeat caesarean section versus vaginal birth for 2 423 women with a previous caesarean birth[J]. ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF CHINESE PLA MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2018, 39(7): 578-580,605. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.07.008
Citation: MA Xiaojuan, WANG Jing, NAN Yanrong. Elective repeat caesarean section versus vaginal birth for 2 423 women with a previous caesarean birth[J]. ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF CHINESE PLA MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2018, 39(7): 578-580,605. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.07.008

单中心5年2 423例剖宫产后妊娠分娩方式分析

Elective repeat caesarean section versus vaginal birth for 2 423 women with a previous caesarean birth

  • 摘要: 目的 探讨延安大学附属医院5年2 423例剖宫产后妊娠病例分娩方式,临床特征及其临床结局。 方法 纳入延安大学附属医院产科2013年1月- 2017年12月剖宫产后妊娠产妇2 423例,根据分娩选择方式分为择期重复剖宫产(elective repeat cesarean delivery,ERCD)组(n=2 184)和剖宫产后阴道试产(trial of labor after cesarean,TOLAC)组(n=239),分别比较妊娠合并症与并发症、产后并发症和新生儿结局情况。 结果 与TOLAC组相比,ERCD组分娩孕周、产次更少孕周:(38.2±2.6)周vs (39.4±1.3)周;产次:1(1 ~ 1) vs 1(1 ~ 2),P均< 0.05);子宫下段肌层厚度更小(30.5±3.6) mm vs (33.7±2.9) mm,P< 0.001,距前次分娩时间更短(3.8±2.7)年vs (4.6±3.1)年,P< 0.001;ERCD组子痫前期发生率高于TOLAC组(6.2% vs 0.8%,P=0.001),子宫破裂发生率低于TOLAC组(0例vs 2例,P< 0.001);ERCD组新生儿5'Apgar评分和出生体质量均低于TOLAC组Apgar:(9.6±0.7) vs (9.8±0.4);体质量:(3 168.5±418.2) g vs (3 250.3±441.3) g,P均< 0.05;其余指标差异无统计学意义(P均> 0.05)。 结论 对剖宫产后妊娠产妇,根据相关指南规范实施TOLAC的母儿结局相对安全,应“个体化”选择分娩方式。

     

    Abstract: Objective To investigate the delivery mode, clinical characteristics and outcome of 2 423 women with a previous caesarean birth in Affiliated Hospital of Yan'an University in recent 5 years. Methods From January 2013 to December 2017, 2 423 pregnant women with previous cesarean section admitted to our hospital. According to the mode of delivery, they were divided into elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD) group (n=2 184) and trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) group (n=239). The complications of pregnancy, postpartum complications and neonatal outcomes were compared between two groups. Results Compared with TOLAC group, ERCD group had less gestational age(38.2±2.6) weeks vs (39.4±1.3) weeks, less parity1(1-1)vs 1(1-2), smaller lower uterine segment thickness(30.5±3.6) mm vs (33.7±2.9) mm and shorter interdelivery interval(3.8±2.7) years vs(4.6±3.1) years (all P< 0.05). The incidence of preeclampsia in ERCD group was higher than that in TOLAC group (6.2% vs 0.8%), while the incidence of uterine rupture was lower (0 case vs 2 cases) (P< 0.05, respectively). The 5'Apgar score and birth weight of neonates in ERCD group were all less than those in TOLAC groupApgar, (9.6±0.7) vs (9.8±0.4); birth weight (3 168.5±418.2) g vs (3 250.3±441.3) g (P< 0.05, respectively). Conclusion For pregnant women with a previous caesarean birth, the implementation of TOLAC is relatively safe according to the guidelines, and the mode of delivery should be individualized.

     

/

返回文章
返回