文章摘要
分析臀位外倒转术的妊娠结局及与成功率相关的影响因素
Analysis onpregnancy outcome of external cephalic version for term breech presentation and its influencing factors affecting success
投稿时间:2020-04-23  
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1000-0399.2021.06.005
中文关键词: 臀先露  外倒转术  剖宫产  胎位  妊娠结局
英文关键词: Breech  External cephalic version  Cesarean section  Fetal position  Pregnancy outcome
基金项目:安徽省科技厅重点研发项目(项目编号:201904a07020008)
作者单位E-mail
高薇 230001 合肥 安徽省妇幼保健院妇产科  
蒋晓敏 230001 合肥 安徽省妇幼保健院妇产科 530425973@qq.com 
周曙光 230001 合肥 安徽省妇幼保健院妇产科  
章小宝 230001 合肥 安徽省妇幼保健院妇产科  
陈果 230001 合肥 安徽省妇幼保健院妇产科  
摘要点击次数: 1689
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      目的 探讨臀位外倒转术(ECV)的临床应用价值,分析与ECV成功率相关的影响因素方法 回顾性收集2019年2月至2020年7月在安徽省妇幼保健院定期产检并在本院产科分娩的胎儿臀位孕妇资料123例,其中实施ECV 40例,计划剖宫产83例。实施ECV的孕妇中,成功转为头位经阴道分娩23例(ECV成功组),失败17例(ECV失败组)。比较ECV成功组、ECV失败组与计划剖宫产组间妊娠结局的差异;并对ECV成功组与ECV失败组间相关影响因素的差异进行统计学分析结果 ECV成功组、ECV失败组与计划剖宫产组间一般情况比较,产史和分娩孕周比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);孕妇年龄、孕妇身体质量指数(BMI)及新生儿出生体质量比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。三组间子宫切除、胎儿损伤、羊水污染、新生儿死亡、新生儿窒息和新生儿1分钟、5分钟Apgar评分等妊娠结局指标比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。ECV成功组与ECV失败组间孕妇年龄、产史、ECV操作孕周、ECV操作时胎儿估算体质量、孕妇BMI、先露入盆情况、脐带是否绕颈、脐带长度和羊水指数比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);臀位类型、胎盘位置和孕妇皮下脂肪厚度在两组间比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多因素分析,非后壁胎盘和孕妇皮下脂肪较厚是外倒转失败的风险因素结论 实施ECV是安全的。孕妇皮下脂肪厚、非后壁胎盘不利于倒转成功。
英文摘要:
      Objective To discuss the clinical value of external cephalic version (ECV) for term breech presentation with an analysis on its success factors. Methods A total of 123 cases of pregnant women with breech presentation who underwent regular prenatal examinations and delivered in Anhui Province Maternity and Child Health Hospital from February 2019 to July 2020 were retrospectively selected, including 43 cases who underwent external cephalic and 80 cases who underwent planned cesarean section. Among the ECV group, 23 cases were successfully transferred to vaginal delivery of the head position (ECV success group), and 17 cases failed (ECV failure group). The pregnancy outcome and the relevant success influencing factors were compared and analyzed between ECV success group, ECV failure group and the planned cesarean section group. Results In comparison among the three groups, there were statistical significance (P<0.05) in terms of parturition number and gestational weeks of delivery. But there was no significant difference in maternal age, maternal BMI and birth weight of newborns (P>0.05). And there was no statistical significance (P>0.05) for the factors in terms of hysterectomy, neonatal birth injury, amniotic fluid turbidity, neonatal mortality, neonatal asphyxiation and Apgar score among the three groups. There was no statistical significance (P>0.05) in terms of such factors as maternal age, parturition number, gestational age, estimation of fetal weight, maternal body mass index, breech position, umbilical cord length, cord around neck or not, or amniotic fluid index between ECV success group and ECV failure group. There were statistical significance (P<0.05) in terms of type of breech, fetal position and the thickness of subcutaneous fat in pregnant women between the two groups (P<0.05). Non-posterior placenta and thicker subcutaneous fat were risk factors for failure of external inversion according a multivariate analysis. Conclusions ECV is safe to be performed. Non-posterior placenta and thicker subcutaneous fat in pregnant women are the risk factors for success.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭