首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology >Trail of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section: a comparison of morbidity and mortality at tertiary care teaching hospitals in India
【24h】

Trail of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section: a comparison of morbidity and mortality at tertiary care teaching hospitals in India

机译:分娩与选择性重复剖宫产的轨迹:印度三级教学医院的发病率和死亡率比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: As cesarean birth rates continue to rise, more women are faced with the choice of planning a vaginal delivery or a repeat cesarean section after a previous cesarean section. The objective of this prospective study was to study the morbidities and mortality of women attempting a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) versus elective repeat cesarean section (El-RCS). Methods: Prospective data was recorded on management practices, associated complications and morbidity & mortality for a period of 8 months on 15664 consecutive cases of previous cesarean section reporting at 30 medical colleges/ teaching hospitals for delivery. Results: A trial of labor was planned in 25.8% (4035) women and 34.5% (5399) women underwent elective repeat cesarean section and rest had emergency repeat cesarean section. Overall maternal morbidity due to any cause was 20.7% among El-RCS as compared to 14.2% in TOLAC which was statistically significant (OR: 1.57, CI: 1.41-1.76, P=0.00). Blood loss of more than 1000ml was around 8.0% among TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 8.8% (OR: 0.89, CI: 0.77-1.94, p=0.14 not statistically significant). Blood transfusion was given in 3.7% in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was given in 6.5% (OR: 0.56, CI: 0.45-0.68, p=0.00 highly significant). Complication like dehiscence of scar was similar in both groups. Post-operative complication were seen in 2.8% cases in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 5.8% (OR: 0.47, CI: 0.38-0.59, p=0.00 highly significant). Uterine rupture was 0.3% in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 0.7% (OR: 0.43, CI: 0.21-0.87, p=0.009 statistically significant). Maternal mortality was reported in 0.2% cases of TOLAC as compared to 0.1% cases in El-RCS (p=0.17) which was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Maternal morbidity was found to be more in elective repeat cesarean section than trial of labor after cesarean section.
机译:背景:随着剖宫产率的持续上升,越来越多的妇女面临着在计划剖宫产后计划进行阴道分娩或再次剖宫产的选择。这项前瞻性研究的目的是研究剖宫产后剖宫产(TOLAC)与选择性重复剖宫产(El-RCS)的妇女的发病率和死亡率。方法:在30所医学院校/教学医院连续报告15664例先前剖宫产的连续病例,记录为期8个月的管理实践,相关并发症以及发病率和死亡率的前瞻性数据。结果:计划进行人工分娩重复剖宫产的妇女中有25.8%(4035)和34.5%(5399)的妇女进行了分娩试验,休息时有紧急重复剖宫产的妇女。在任何原因下,El-RCS的总体孕产妇发病率为20.7%,而TOLAC中为14.2%,具有统计学意义(OR:1.57,CI:1.41-1.76,P = 0.00)。在TOLAC中,超过1000ml的失血量约为8.0%,而在El-RCS中则为8.8%(OR:0.89,CI:0.77-1.94,p = 0.14,无统计学意义)。 TOLAC输血率为3.7%,而El-RCS输血率为6.5%(OR:0.56,CI:0.45-0.68,p = 0.00非常显着)。两组的疤痕开裂等并发症相似。 TOLAC的术后并发症为2.8%,而El-RCS为5.8%(OR:0.47,CI:0.38-0.59,p = 0.00非常显着)。子宫破裂在TOLAC中为0.3%,而在El-RCS中为0.7%(OR:0.43,CI:0.21-0.87,P = 0.009,具有统计学意义)。据报告,TOLAC病例的孕产妇死亡率为0.2%,而El-RCS为0.1%(p = 0.17),但无统计学意义。结论:择期重复剖宫产的产妇发病率高于剖宫产后的分娩试验。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号