切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华产科急救电子杂志 ›› 2023, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (04) : 244 -248. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2023.04.012

论著

前次剖宫产时机对再次妊娠合并前置胎盘患者临床结局的影响
印贤琴, 刘宇茵, 毛丽丽, 孙雯, 陈敦金()   
  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 广东省产科重大疾病重点实验室
  • 收稿日期:2023-09-01 出版日期:2023-11-18
  • 通信作者: 陈敦金
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划"生育健康及妇女儿童健康"重点专项项目(2022YFC2704500); 广州市科创委一般项目(202201010907); 广州市卫生和计划生育委员会一般引导项目(20231A011094)

Effect of timing of previous cesarean section on clinical outcomes of second pregnancy with placenta previa.

Xianqin Yin, Yuyin Liu, Lili Mao, Wen Sun, Dunjin Chen()   

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Medical Center for Gitical Pregnant Women, Key Laboratory for Major Obstetric Diseases of Guangdong Province, Guangzhou 510515, China
  • Received:2023-09-01 Published:2023-11-18
  • Corresponding author: Dunjin Chen
引用本文:

印贤琴, 刘宇茵, 毛丽丽, 孙雯, 陈敦金. 前次剖宫产时机对再次妊娠合并前置胎盘患者临床结局的影响[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(04): 244-248.

Xianqin Yin, Yuyin Liu, Lili Mao, Wen Sun, Dunjin Chen. Effect of timing of previous cesarean section on clinical outcomes of second pregnancy with placenta previa.[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2023, 12(04): 244-248.

目的

探讨产程中转剖宫产及临产前择期剖宫产对再次妊娠合并前置胎盘患者临床结局的影响。

方法

回顾分析2016年10月至2021年10月在广州医科大学附属第三医院住院分娩的既往单次剖宫产史、本次妊娠诊断合并前置胎盘的658例单胎患者的临床资料,依据前次剖宫产时机将患者分为临产前择期剖宫产组(择期组,505例)及中转剖宫产组(中转组,153例),追溯前次剖宫产指征,比较两组患者的临床特征及本次妊娠结局。

结果

两组患者的年龄、体重指数、人工流产次数及生殖助孕率等差异无统计学意义;择期组与中转组比较,合并胎盘植入性疾病比例(69.9% vs 55.6%, χ2=10.858)、术中出血量(<1000 ml:57.6% vs 75.8%,1000~2000 ml:31.7% vs 20.3%,>2000 ml:10.7% vs 3.9%,χ2=17.466)、输注血制品量(>0且≤400 ml:10.1% vs 11.1%,>400且≤1200 ml:15.4% vs 11.1%,>1200 ml:12.3% vs 5.2%, χ2=9.083)、转重症监护病房比例(3.2% vs 0)、术后住院时长(5 d vs 4 d,Ζ=-2.528)、总住院时长(9 d vs 8 d,Ζ=-2.260)及足月分娩率(32.3% vs 45.1%,χ2=8.448),差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

临产前择期剖宫产是再次妊娠发生前置胎盘合并胎盘植入的高危因素,其母儿不良结局发生率高。

Objective

To evaluate the effect of the timing of previous cesarean section on outcomes of subsequent pregnancy complicated with placenta previa.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study. 658 women with placenta previa, who were all singleton pregnancies and had only one previous cesarean section, were analyzed in Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from October 2016 to October 2021. According to the timing of the previous cesarean section, the patients were divided into Elective cesarean (EC group) and Intrapartum cesarean (IC group). The two groups′ clinical characteristics and maternal and neonatal outcomes were analyzed.

Results

There were 505 cases in the EC group and 153 cases in the IC group. No significant differences were found in age, BMI, abortion frequency, reproductive-assisted pregnancy rate and distance from the previous cesarean section between the two groups. The rates of placenta accrete spectrum disorders (69.9% vs 55.6%, χ2=10.858), intraoperative hemorrhage volume (<1000ml: 57.6% vs 75.8%, 1000~2000 ml: 31.7% vs 20.3%, >2000 ml: 10.7% vs 3.9%, χ2=17.466), blood transfusion volume (>0 but ≤400 ml: 10.1% vs 11.1%, >400 but ≤1200 ml: 15.4% vs 11.1%, >1200 ml: 12.3% vs 5.2%, χ2=9.083), the rates of ICU occupancy (3.2% vs 0), postoperative hospitalization days (5 vs 4, Ζ=-2.528), total hospitalization days (9 vs 8, Ζ=-2.260) and the term delivery rate (32.3% vs 45.1%, χ2=8.448) between the EC group and the IC group were statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Elective caesarean section before labor onset is a high-risk factor for placenta previa complicated with PAS in a subsequent pregnancy, and maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes are higher.

表1 两组患者本次妊娠母体结局比较
表2 两组患者本次妊娠新生儿结局比较
[1]
Qiao J, Wang YY, Li XH, et al. A Lancet Commission on 70 years of women′s reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health in China[J]. Lancet2021397(10293):2497-2536.
[2]
Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ, et al. WHO statement on caesarean section rates[J]. BJOG2016123(5):667-670.
[3]
Jauniaux E, Bhide A, Kennedy A, et al.FIGO placenta accreta diagnosis and management expert consensus panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: prenatal diagnosis and screening[J].Int J Gynaecol Obstet2018140(3):274-280.
[4]
谢幸,孔北华,段涛. 妇产科学[M]. 9版.北京:人民卫生出版社,2018:148-149.
[5]
中华医学会围产医学分会,中华医学会妇产科学分会产科学组.胎盘植入诊治指南(2015)[J/OL].中华产科急救电子杂志20165(1):26-31.
[6]
蔡建云,顾新安,王谨,等. 疤痕子宫合并中央性前置胎盘的围术期并发症[J]. 中国妇幼健康研究201829(3):349-352.
[7]
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstetric care consensus No. 7: placenta accreta spectrum[J].Obstetrics and Gynecology2018132(6):e259-275.
[8]
Thurn L, Lindqvist PG, Jakobsson M, et al. Abnormally invasive placenta prevalence, risk factors and antenatal suspicion: results from a large population based pregnancy cohort study in the Nordic countries[J]. BJOG2016123(8):1348-1355.
[9]
Rosenberg T, Pariente G, Sergienko R, et al. Critical analysis of risk factors and outcome of placenta previa[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet2011284(1):47-51.
[10]
Bowman ZS, Eller AG, Bardsley TR, et al. Risk factors for placenta accreta: a large prospective cohort[J]. Am J Perinatol201431(9):799-804.
[11]
Carusi DAFox KALyell DJ,et al. Placenta accreta spectrum without placenta previa[J]. Obstet Gynecol2020136(3):458-465.
[12]
卞政,应豪. 预防初次剖宫产指南对促进阴道试产的作用[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志201733(6):571-575.
[13]
Brahmalakshmy BL, Kushtagi P. Variables influencing the integrity of lower uterine segment in post cesarean pregnancy[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet2015291(4):755-762.
[14]
魏素梅,杨霄,金莹,等. 前次剖宫产手术对再次妊娠胎盘植入及其类型的影响[J]. 实用妇产科杂志201733(10):790-792.
[15]
Kamara MHenderson JJDoherty DA,et al.The risk of placenta accreta following primary elective caesarean delivery: a case-control study[J].BJOG2013120(7):879-886.
[16]
Shynlova O, Lee YH, Srikhajon K, et al. Physiologic uterine inflammation and labor onset: integration of endocrine and mechanical signals[J]. Reprod Sci201320(2):154-167.
[17]
侯磊,李光辉,邹丽颖,等. 全国剖宫产率及剖宫产指征构成比调查的多中心研究[J]. 中华妇产科杂志201449(10):728-735.
[1] 何雪威, 谷美玉, 吴亭亭. 超声子宫动脉及子宫内膜血流参数对不明原因复发性流产患者妊娠结局的影响[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(11): 1158-1163.
[2] 杨皓媛, 龚杰, 邹青伟, 阮航. 哮喘孕妇的母婴不良妊娠结局研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 522-529.
[3] 陈甜甜, 王晓东, 余海燕. 双胎妊娠合并Gitelman综合征孕妇的妊娠结局及文献复习[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 559-568.
[4] 居晓庆, 金蕴洁, 王晓燕. 剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫患者再次妊娠阴道分娩发生子宫破裂的影响因素分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 575-581.
[5] 顾娟, 孙擎擎, 胡方方, 曹义娟, 祁玉娟. 子宫内膜容受性检测改善胚胎反复种植失败患者妊娠结局的临床应用[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 582-587.
[6] 周梦玲, 薛志伟, 周淑. 妊娠合并子宫肌瘤的孕期变化及其与不良妊娠结局的关系[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 611-615.
[7] 陈莉, 雷雪芹, 段炼, 曾悦, 何国琳. 影响2次剖宫产术后阴道试产产妇试产成功因素及妊娠结局分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 287-294.
[8] 陈樱, 陈艳莉. 高龄孕妇心率变异性原因及围产结局分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 295-301.
[9] 冯丹艳, 曹晓辉, 史玉霞. 血清脂联素与胎盘亮氨酸氨肽酶对妊娠期糖尿病患者妊娠结局的影响[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(03): 302-308.
[10] 任国华, 杜晓晓, 洪善玲, 邵帅. 妊娠期高血压并发急性肾损伤患者血清白细胞介素-22、硫化氢及护骨素水平的变化与意义[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 150-155.
[11] 张郁妍, 胡滨, 张伟红, 徐楣, 朱慧, 羊馨玥, 刘海玲. 妊娠中期心血管超声参数与肝功能的相关性及对不良妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 499-504.
[12] 王欣, 刘琳, 闻哲嘉, 刘春玲, 张弘, 吕芳. 妊娠前应激暴露对小鼠后续妊娠的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 431-437.
[13] 吴晓翔, 杨波, 李景漩, 张凤玲, 郭桂辉, 郑少培. 脐动脉超声检查联合NLR、sFlt-1/PLGF对妊娠高血压综合征患者不良妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 266-271.
[14] 中国医师协会妇产科分会母胎医学专委会, 中华医学会围产医学分会重症学组. 预防性介入治疗在胎盘植入性疾病的应用专家共识(2023)[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 133-140.
[15] 赵先兰, 周艳. 胎盘植入性疾病出血血管介入治疗策略[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 147-150.
阅读次数
全文


摘要