切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华产科急救电子杂志

中华产科急救电子杂志 ›› 2016, Vol. 05 ›› Issue (02) : 110 -113. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2016.02.010

所属专题： 文献；

论著

单胎臀位外倒转术的影响因素分析
王晓怡1, 黄赟博1, 林琳1, 陈敦金1,†()   
  1. 1. 510150　广州医科大学附属第三医院妇产科　广州重症孕产妇救治中心
  • 收稿日期:2016-03-06 出版日期:2016-05-18
  • 通信作者: 陈敦金

Analyzing influencing factors of external cephalic version for breech presentation in singleton pregnancies

Xiaoyi Wang1, Yunbo Huang1, Lin Lin1, Dunjin Chen1,†()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510150, China
  • Received:2016-03-06 Published:2016-05-18
  • Corresponding author: Dunjin Chen
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Chen Dunjin, Email:
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

王晓怡, 黄赟博, 林琳, 陈敦金. 单胎臀位外倒转术的影响因素分析[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2016, 05(02): 110-113.

Xiaoyi Wang, Yunbo Huang, Lin Lin, Dunjin Chen. Analyzing influencing factors of external cephalic version for breech presentation in singleton pregnancies[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2016, 05(02): 110-113.

目的

探讨影响单胎臀位外倒转术成功率的相关因素。

方法

对2015年11月至2016年4月就诊于广州医科大学附属第三医院妇产科进行外倒转术的20例单胎孕妇的临床资料进行回顾性分析，患者均为单胎妊娠，孕龄在35～38周之间，不合并绝对剖宫产指征，均愿接受行外倒转术。分析影响外倒转术成功率的相关因素，统计学采用χ2检验。

结果

20例外倒转术有14例(70%)完成倒转，其中12例(60%)倒转成功并经阴道分娩。比较单臀位和复合臀位[7/9例与7/11例]，初产妇及经产妇[5/8例与9/12例]、胎盘位于前壁、后壁和宫底[5/8例，6/8例与3/4例]、妊娠足月与否[4/6例与10/14例]、羊水量正常与否[12/17例与2/3例]、脐带绕颈与否[2/4例与12/16例]的外倒转成功率，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。胎儿窘迫、胎盘早剥和早产的发生率分别为10.0%(2/20)例、5.0%(1/20)例和2/14例。

结论

外倒转术能较为安全有效将臀位转为头位，适用于足月或近足月妊娠，可达到降低剖宫产率的目的。

关键词: 臀位, 外倒转术, 并发症
Objective

To analyze the influencing factors of external cephalic version (ECV) for breech presentation in singleton pregnancies.

Methods

Twenty pregnant women were single pregnancy with breech presentation during 35-38 weeks of gestation. They were without other indications for cesarean section and volunteered to undergo ECV, who were admitted in the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from November 2015 to April 2016. The clinical data of 20 pregnant women were retrospectively analyzed. The factors influencing the success rate of ECV were analyzed by χ2 tests.

Results

The success rate of ECV was 70% (14/20), and 12 cases (60%) underwent vaginal delivery at the end. There was no significant difference in the success rates between frank breech presentation and complete breech presentation (seven ninths vs. seven elevenths). Compared with primiparas and multiparas (five eighths vs. nine twelfths), it was not significant different. Compared in placenta position, deliver time, amniotic fluid volume and umbilical cord condition, there were not different. The incidences of fetal distress, placental abruption and premature delivery were 10.0%(2/20 cases), 5.0%(1/20 cases) and 14.3%(2/14 cases), separately.

Conclusion

To reduce the cesarean section rate, ECV for signal pregnancy with breech presentation in full-term and nearly full-term can effectively adjust the fetal position.

Key words: Breech presentation, External cephalic version, Complication
表1 不同因素对外倒转术成功的影响
影响因素 总例数 成功例数 成功率(%) χ2值 P值
臀位类型 ? ? ? ? ?
? 单臀位 9 7 7/9a 0.038 0.642
? 复合臀位 11 7 7/11a ? ?
产次 ? ? ? ? ?
? 初产妇 8 5 5/8a 0.010 0.642
? 经产妇 12 9 9/12a ? ?
胎盘位置 ? ? ? ? ?
? 前壁 8 5 5/8a 0.357 0.836
? 后壁 8 6 6/8a ? ?
? 宫底 4 3 3/4a ? ?
实施外倒转术的孕周 ? ? ? ? ?
? 足月 6 4 4/6a 0.000 1.000
? 未足月 14 10 10/14a ? ?
羊水量 ? ? ? ? ?
? 正常 17 12 21/17a 0.000 1.000
? 过少 3 2 2/3a ? ?
脐带绕颈 ? ? ? ? ?
? 是 4 2 2/4a 0.134 0.549
? 否 16 12 12/16a ? ?
[1]
Saroha M, Batra P, Dewan P, et al. Genital injuries in neonates following breech presentation[J]. J Neonatal Perinatal Med, 2015, 8(4):421-425.
[2]
Lyons J, Pressey T, Bartholomew S, et al. Delivery of breech presentation at term gestation in Canada, 2003-2011[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 125(5):1153-1161.
[3]
Hutton EK, Hofmeyr GJ, Dowswell T. External cephalic version for breech presentation before term[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015, 7:CD000084.
[4]
Hofmeyr GJ, Kulier R, West HM. External cephalic version for breech presentation at term[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015, 4:CD000083.
[5]
Saling E, Müller-Holve W. External cephalic version under tocolysis[J]. J Perinat Med, 1975, 3(2):115-122.
[6]
邓新琼，覃晓慧，廖滔，等. 多学科联合对足月单胎臀位外倒转43例临床分析[J]. 现代妇产科进展，2016, 25(1): 54-55.
[7]
Ebner F, Friedl TW, Leinert E, et al. Predictors for a successful external cephalic version: a single centre experience[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2016, 293(4):749-755.
[8]
Weiniger CF, Ginosar Y, Elchalal U, et al. Randomized controlled trial of external cephalic version in term multiparae with or without spinal analgesia[J]. Br J Anaesth, 2010, 104(5):613-618.
[9]
Kok M, Cnossen J, Gravendeel L, et al. Ultrasound factors to predict the outcome of external cephalic version: a meta-analysis[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 33(1):76-84.
[10]
Guyer CH, Heard MJ. A prospective audit of external cephalic version at term: are ultrasound parameters predictive of outcome？[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol, 2001, 21(6):580-582.
[11]
Kuppens SM, Waerenburgh ER, Kooistra L, et al. The relation between umbilical cord characteristics and the outcome of external cephalic version[J]. Early Hum Dev, 2011, 87(5):369-372.
[1] 金鑫, 谢卯, 刘芸, 杨操, 杨述华, 许伟华. 个性化股骨导向器辅助初次全髋关节置换的随机对照研究[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 780-787.
[2] 易晨, 张亚东, 董茜, 唐海阔, 刘志国. 应用骨盖技术拔除下颌低位骨性埋伏阻生第三磨牙的疗效观察[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 424-429.
[3] 杜滨和, 徐楠, 杨云川, 崔培元. 5项改良衰弱指数预测胰十二指肠切除术近期预后的价值探讨[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 444-448.
[4] 李建美, 邓静娟, 杨倩. 两种术式联合治疗肝癌合并肝硬化门静脉高压的安全性及随访评价[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 41-44.
[5] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[6] 杨体飞, 杨传虎, 陆振如. 改良无充气经腋窝入路全腔镜下甲状腺手术对喉返神经功能的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 74-77.
[7] 陈大敏, 曹晓刚, 曹能琦. 肥胖对胃癌患者手术治疗效果的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 651-653.
[8] 陈垚, 徐伯群, 高志慧. 改良式中间上入路根治术治疗甲状腺癌的有效性安全性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 619-622.
[9] 曹智, 朱希望, 王尉, 张辉, 杨成林, 张小明. 经皮肾镜碎石取石术中不同肾盂内压力与围术期并发症相关性研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 616-620.
[10] 叶晋生, 路夷平, 梁燕凯, 于淼, 冀祯, 贺志坚, 张洪海, 王洁. 腹腔镜下应用生物补片修补直肠术后盆底缺损的疗效[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 688-691.
[11] 袁伟, 张修稳, 潘宏波, 章军, 王虎, 黄敏. 平片式与填充式腹股沟疝修补术的疗效比较[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 697-701.
[12] 夏松, 姚嗣会, 汪勇刚. 经腹腹膜前与疝环充填式疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的对照研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 702-705.
[13] 代格格, 杨丽, 胡媛媛, 周文婷. 手术室综合干预在老年腹股沟疝患者中的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 759-763.
[14] 王敏, 蒋家斌, 李茂新. 预警宣教联合个性化疼痛管理对腹股沟疝手术患者的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 764-767.
[15] 戴玮, 江桂林, 车兆平, 张姣, 王星星, 赵海涛. 无缝手术护理在腹股沟疝腹腔镜手术围手术期的应用效果[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 778-781.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号