疤痕子宫再次妊娠分娩的风险及再次行剖宫产术的相关指标分析  

Risk of uterine scar pregnancy childbirth again and related index analysis of cesarean section

作　　者：马爱青[1] 李明江[2] 

机构地区：[1]济南市长清区人民医院妇产科,济南250300 [2]山东大学附属省立医院妇科,济南250021

出　　处：《中国性科学》2016年第11期112-114,共3页Chinese Journal of Human Sexuality

摘　　要：目的:探讨疤痕子宫再次妊娠分娩的风险与相关并发症,研究预防措施。方法:回顾性分析我院2013年1月至2015年3月收治的120例疤痕子宫妊娠分娩患者(观察组)与115例非疤痕子宫妊娠分娩患者(对照组)的临床资料。结果:剖宫产仍是疤痕子宫妊娠的主要分娩方式,社会因素仍是主要原因,两组比较差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组的胎儿窘迫、产程进展异常、脐带绕颈显著低于对照组,具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。对照组剖宫产术的手术时间、术中出血量、恶露持续时间显著低于观察组,具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组术中粘连情况显著较对照组严重,具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:与非疤痕子宫妊娠分娩相比,疤痕子宫再次妊娠后分娩存在较大风险,应严格控制非医学指征剖宫产。Objectives： To study the risk of uterine scar pregnancy,the related complications and the preventive measures. Methods： A retrospective analysis was done on clinical data of 120 patients with uterine scar pregnancy childbirth（ observation group） and 115 cases of scar uterus pregnancy childbirth（ control group） in our hospital from January 2013 to March 2013. Results： Cesarean section was still the main approach to childbirth uterine scar pregnancy. Social factor was still the main reason. The difference between two groups was statistically significant（ P〈0. 05）. Fetal distress,abnormal labor progress,umbilical cord around the neck of observation group were significantly lower than these of control group,with statistical significance（ P〈0. 05）. Operation time,intraoperative blood loss,duration of lochia of control group were significantly lower than these of observation group,with statistical significance（ P〈0. 05）. Adhesion in observation group was more serious than control group,with statistical significance（ P〈0. 05）. Conclusion： Compared with the scar uterus pregnancy childbirth,uterine scar pregnancy has a big risk. Taking cesarean section should strictly control the related factors,to ensure that there is no clinical indication of cesarean section surgery.

关 键 词：疤痕子宫 再次妊娠 剖宫产 指征 

分 类 号：R714.2[医药卫生—妇产科学]