...
首页> 外文期刊>The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine >Comparison between the use of the Joel-Cohen incision and its modification during Stark's cesarean section.
【24h】

Comparison between the use of the Joel-Cohen incision and its modification during Stark's cesarean section.

机译:在Stark剖宫产术中Joel-Cohen切口的使用及其修改之间的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: A comparative evaluation between the Joel-Cohen incision and its modification for the Stark's cesarean section (CS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study, 477 women who underwent a Stark's CS were evaluated: 204 with the Joel-Cohen incision (JC) and 273 with a modified Joel-Cohen incision (MJC). All patients were checked for the following parameters: febrile morbidity, the need for painkillers, duration of hospital stay, and ultrasound examination for blood collection (BC) on the third postoperative day. The collections, when diagnosed were divided into three groups: (1) in the abdominal wall, (2) in the pouch of Douglas, and (3) in the lower uterine segment (LUS). Those included in the study were low-risk primiparae at term, presenting for CS for breech presentation, macrosomia, and on demand, and who had combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. Statistical evaluation was performed using SAS/V12 software. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences between the two groups with regard to febrile morbidity, duration of need for painkillers, and hospital stay. Statistically more blood collections were found in the MJC incision group (5.4% in the abdominal wall, 12.4% in the pouch of Douglas, and 11.7% in the LUS) than in the classical JC incision group (3.9% in the abdominal wall, 10.2% in the pouch of Douglas, and 8.8% in the LUS), however without any clinical significance. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of the classical JC incision during the Stark's CS seems to be more rational, and causes fewer blood collections.
机译:目的:比较Joel-Cohen切口及其对斯塔克剖腹产的改良效果。材料与方法:在一项回顾性研究中,对477位接受Stark's CS的妇女进行了评估:204例Joel-Cohen切口(JC)和273例改良的Joel-Cohen切口(MJC)。在术后第三天检查所有患者的以下参数:高热发病率,是否需要使用止痛药,住院时间以及超声检查以检查血液(BC)。诊断时将这些集合分为三组:(1)在腹壁,(2)在道格拉斯的小袋中,和(3)在子宫下段(LUS)。这项研究中包括的是足月低风险的初产妇,针对臀位,大儿和按需进行CS表现,并结合了脊髓-硬膜外麻醉。使用SAS / V12软件进行统计评估。结果:两组之间在高热发病率,需要止痛药的持续时间和住院时间方面无统计学差异。与经典的JC切口组(腹壁3.9%,10.2)相比,MJC切口组(腹壁5.4%,道格拉斯囊袋12.4%,LUS 11.7%)的血液收集量有统计上更多装在道格拉斯的小袋中占百分比,在LUS的小袋中占8.8%),但是没有任何临床意义。结论:在Stark的CS期间常规使用经典的JC切口似乎更为合理,并减少了血液采集。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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