摘要
目的探讨剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫再次妊娠阴道分娩的临床效果观察。方法选取2016年1月—2017年2月我院妇产科收治的100例剖宫产后瘢痕子宫再次妊娠产妇作为研究对象,将其随机分为A组(50例)、B组(50例)。A组孕妇接受阴道分娩,B组孕妇接受剖宫产;同时选择同期50例非瘢痕子宫阴道分娩产妇,设为C组。比较三组产妇妊娠结局。结果 A、B组产妇产后出血、新生儿体质量、住院时间等比较,差异均具有统计学意义(t值分别为10.966,3.432,19.155,P<0.05);A、B组新生儿Apgar评分比较,差异不具有统计学意义(t=0.830,P>0.05)。A、C组患者出血量比较,差异不具有统计学意义(t=1.629,P>0.05);新生儿窒息率比较,差异不具有统计学意义(χ~2=2.020,P>0.05)。结论临床中采用阴道分娩使剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫孕妇完成分娩,其具有安全性高,产妇预后良好等优点。
Objective To investigate the clinical effect of vaginal delivery after scar uterus re-delivery after cesarean section. Methods 100 cases of cesarean scar pregnancy after cesarean section in obstetrics and gynecology department from January 2016 to February 2017 were selected as the research objects. They were randomly divided into A group(50 cases), B group(50 cases). A group of pregnant women received vaginal delivery, B group of pregnant women received cesarean section. At the same time, 50 patients with non-scar uterus vaginal delivery in the same period were selected group C. Pregnancy outcomes were compared between the three groups. Results The differences of postpartum hemorrhage, neonatal body weight and hospitalization time between A and B groups were statistically significant(t=10.966, 3.432, 19.155, P < 0.05); There was no significant difference in neonatal Apgar score between group A and group B(t=0.830, P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the amount of bleeding between group A and group C(t=1.629, P > 0.05); The difference of neonatal asphyxia rate was not statistically significant(χ2=2.020, P > 0.05). Conclusion Vaginal delivery in clinical practice makes the delivery of scar uterus to pregnant women after cesarean section. It has the advantages of high safety and good prognosis.
出处
《中国继续医学教育》
2017年第25期72-73,共2页
China Continuing Medical Education
