论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨剖腹产后再次妊娠的分娩情况。方法:选择我院2013年1至2014年7月收治的剖腹产后再次妊娠孕妇150例,将其分成对照组(65例)和实验组(85例),对照组产妇给予再次择期剖腹产分娩,实验组产妇给予经阴道试产分娩。对两组产妇的母婴结局和分娩方式进行对比。结果:实验组85例产妇中,经阴道试产分娩成功68例,试产成功率为80.0%。在试产失败的17例产妇中,8例继发性宫缩乏力,3例头盆不称,4例胎儿宫内窘迫,先兆子宫破和放弃试产各1例。另外实验组产妇的产后出血率和产褥感染率显著优于对照组患者,两者比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组均没有出现子宫破裂。结论:剖腹产后再次妊娠分娩并不是再次剖腹产的绝对指征。对阴道试产条件严格把握,同时根据产妇实际情况,对产程进行严密监测,对满足条件的剖腹产后再次妊娠孕妇给予阴道试产分娩是可靠和安全的。
Objective: To investigate the delivery of cesarean section after pregnancy again. Methods: One hundred and fifty pregnant women who were re-pregnant after caesarean section were randomly divided into control group (65 cases) and experimental group (85 cases) in our hospital from January 2013 to July 2014. The control group was given elective cesarean delivery, and the experiment Group maternal vaginal trial delivery. Maternal and infant outcomes and mode of delivery were compared between the two groups. Results: In the experimental group of 85 maternal, vaginal trial delivery of 68 cases successfully, trial success rate was 80.0%. Among the 17 maternal failures that failed in trial production, 8 were secondary to uterine inertia, 3 were inactive, 4 were fetal distress, and 10 were premature uterine rupture. In addition, the experimental group maternal postpartum hemorrhage rate and puerperal infection rate was significantly better than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05); no uterine rupture in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Reproductive delivery after caesarean section is not an absolute indication of another caesarean section. On vaginal trial production conditions strictly grasp the same time, according to the actual situation of maternal, labor closely monitored, to meet the conditions of caesarean section again pregnant women given vaginal trial delivery is reliable and safe.