论文部分内容阅读
目的探究剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫再次妊娠分娩评估及分娩方式的选择。方法选取该院2013年6月-2017年1月期间收治的瘢痕子宫妊娠分娩产妇198例为研究对象,根据产妇再次分娩方式将其分为观察组(45例)自然分娩和对照组(153例)剖宫产;观察并比较两组间术中、术后产妇及新生儿情况。结果观察组产妇住院时间、产后出血、产褥感染、住院费用及产时出血量均显著低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(t=7.731,χ~2=5.384、11.183,t=17.384、12.382,均P<0.05);两组产妇分娩新生儿体质量、新生儿黄疸、新生儿湿肺及新生儿Apgar评分比较,差异无统计学院意义(t=0.435,χ~2=0.432、0.353,t=0.144,均P>0.05)。结论在医务人员严格掌握适应证的情况下,瘢痕子宫产妇再次妊娠选择自然分娩安全、可靠,较剖宫产更有利于产妇产后恢复。
Objective To investigate the assessment of cesarean scar pregnancy after cesarean section and the choice of delivery mode. Methods A total of 198 pregnant women with scarring uterine pregnancy who were admitted to our hospital from June 2013 to January 2017 were selected as study subjects and divided into observation group (45 cases) and childbirth group (153 cases ) Cesarean section; observed and compared between the two groups intraoperative and postoperative maternal and neonatal conditions. Results The length of hospital stay, postpartum hemorrhage, puerperal infection, hospitalization costs and the amount of bleeding during labor in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (t = 7.731, χ ~ 2 = 5.384,11.183, t = 17.384, 12.382, all P <0.05). There was no significant difference in the neonatal weight, neonatal jaundice, neonatal wet lung and neonatal Apgar score between the two groups (t = 0.435, χ ~ 2 = 0.432, 0.353, t = 0.144, all P> 0.05). Conclusion In the case of medical staff strictly accredited indications, scar pregnancy, uterine pregnancy choose natural childbirth safe, reliable, more conducive to postpartum recovery than cesarean section.