Comparative analysis of second- and third-trimester complete uterine rupture cases followed up in a tertiary hospital: a retrospective cohort study

Ç. Özgökçe, Aydın Ocal, O. Demirci
{"title":"Comparative analysis of second- and third-trimester complete uterine rupture cases followed up in a tertiary hospital: a retrospective cohort study","authors":"Ç. Özgökçe, Aydın Ocal, O. Demirci","doi":"10.32322/jhsm.1227049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: There are not many studies that compared the uterine rupture cases pertaining to different trimesters of pregnancy in terms of the changes in relevant risk factors and fetomaternal outcomes. In this context, this study was carried out to comparatively analyze the cases who were diagnosed with complete uterine rupture and gave birth in the hospital where this study was conducted in terms of the relevant risk factors and fetomaternal outcomes. \nMaterial and Method: The population of this retrospective study consisted of patients who were diagnosed with complete uterine rupture and gave birth in our hospital between January 2015 and June 2022. Patients’ demographic characteristics, cesarean section, labor induction histories, and fetal and maternal outcomes were recorded. The patients included in this study were divided into two groups based on the trimester when the complete uterine rupture occurred as second- and third-trimester complete uterine rupture groups. The groups were compared in terms of fetal, maternal, and obstetric outcomes. \nResults: Out of the 56718 deliveries performed during the study period, a total of 27 complete uterine rupture cases, of whom 10 had second-, and 17 had third-trimester uterine rupture, were included in the study sample. Accordingly, the incidence of rupture was calculated as 0.047%. Of these 27 cases, 9 had re-pregnancy. Bilateral hypogastric artery ligation was performed in seven patients and six of these patients were in the third trimester rupture group. Of the 27 cases with complete uterine rupture, 19 had a cesarean section history. All 8 cases that did not have a cesarean section history had a complete uterine rupture in the third trimester. \nConclusion: Complete uterine rupture is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Fertility-sparing surgery (primary repair) is the first-line therapy. The prognosis of second-trimester uterine ruptures is more unfavorable compared to third-trimester uterine ruptures from the fetal point of view yet more favorable from the maternal point of view.","PeriodicalId":176872,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.1227049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: There are not many studies that compared the uterine rupture cases pertaining to different trimesters of pregnancy in terms of the changes in relevant risk factors and fetomaternal outcomes. In this context, this study was carried out to comparatively analyze the cases who were diagnosed with complete uterine rupture and gave birth in the hospital where this study was conducted in terms of the relevant risk factors and fetomaternal outcomes. Material and Method: The population of this retrospective study consisted of patients who were diagnosed with complete uterine rupture and gave birth in our hospital between January 2015 and June 2022. Patients’ demographic characteristics, cesarean section, labor induction histories, and fetal and maternal outcomes were recorded. The patients included in this study were divided into two groups based on the trimester when the complete uterine rupture occurred as second- and third-trimester complete uterine rupture groups. The groups were compared in terms of fetal, maternal, and obstetric outcomes. Results: Out of the 56718 deliveries performed during the study period, a total of 27 complete uterine rupture cases, of whom 10 had second-, and 17 had third-trimester uterine rupture, were included in the study sample. Accordingly, the incidence of rupture was calculated as 0.047%. Of these 27 cases, 9 had re-pregnancy. Bilateral hypogastric artery ligation was performed in seven patients and six of these patients were in the third trimester rupture group. Of the 27 cases with complete uterine rupture, 19 had a cesarean section history. All 8 cases that did not have a cesarean section history had a complete uterine rupture in the third trimester. Conclusion: Complete uterine rupture is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Fertility-sparing surgery (primary repair) is the first-line therapy. The prognosis of second-trimester uterine ruptures is more unfavorable compared to third-trimester uterine ruptures from the fetal point of view yet more favorable from the maternal point of view.
某三级医院妊娠中期和晚期完全子宫破裂病例的回顾性队列研究
目的:比较不同妊娠期子宫破裂的相关危险因素及结局变化的研究不多。在此背景下,本研究对在本研究所在医院诊断为完全性子宫破裂分娩的病例进行相关危险因素及母婴结局的比较分析。材料与方法:本回顾性研究的人群为2015年1月至2022年6月在我院诊断为完全性子宫破裂并分娩的患者。记录患者的人口统计学特征、剖宫产、引产史以及胎儿和母体结局。本研究纳入的患者根据发生完全子宫破裂的妊娠时间分为妊娠中期和妊娠晚期完全子宫破裂组。比较两组胎儿、产妇和产科结局。结果:在研究期间进行的56718例分娩中,共有27例完全子宫破裂病例纳入研究样本,其中10例为妊娠中期子宫破裂,17例为妊娠晚期子宫破裂。据此,计算破裂发生率为0.047%。27例中,9例再次妊娠。7例患者行双侧腹下动脉结扎术,其中6例为妊娠晚期破裂组。完全性子宫破裂27例,有剖宫产史19例。8例无剖宫产史的患者均在妊娠晚期发生子宫完全破裂。结论:完全子宫破裂与不良的母胎结局有关。保留生育能力的手术(初级修复)是一线治疗方法。从胎儿的角度来看,中期子宫破裂的预后比晚期子宫破裂的预后更不利,但从母体的角度来看,预后更有利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信