Comparative Efficacy of Abdominal Aortic ABO (AABO) vs Common Iliac Artery ABO (CIABO) in Cesarean Delivery for Central Placenta Previa with Placenta Accreta: A Retrospective Study.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
International Journal of Women's Health Pub Date : 2025-04-09 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IJWH.S512150
Yumei Cao, Yunxia Zhao, Jianlei Ren, Lan Ma, Zhenlan Wu, Qingliang Lv
{"title":"Comparative Efficacy of Abdominal Aortic ABO (AABO) vs Common Iliac Artery ABO (CIABO) in Cesarean Delivery for Central Placenta Previa with Placenta Accreta: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Yumei Cao, Yunxia Zhao, Jianlei Ren, Lan Ma, Zhenlan Wu, Qingliang Lv","doi":"10.2147/IJWH.S512150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the safety and efficacy of abdominal aortic balloon occlusion (AABO) and common iliac artery balloon occlusion (CIABO) in cesarean deliveries for central placenta previa with placenta accreta, using a retrospective study design.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 65 patients with central placenta previa and placenta accreta who underwent cesarean delivery at our hospital between January 2020 and April 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: the observation group (n=35) received AABO, while the control group (n=30) received CIABO. Outcomes compared included intraoperative blood loss, maternal and neonatal outcomes, and other relevant factors. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0, with normally distributed quantitative data assessed by <i>t</i>-tests and categorical data by chi-square tests. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The AABO group had significantly reduced balloon placement time, radiation exposure, intraoperative blood loss (mean 800 ± 150 mL vs 1200 ± 180 mL in CIABO; p<0.05), and transfusion volume (mean 400 ± 100 mL vs 600 ± 120 mL in CIABO; p<0.05). The hysterectomy rate was lower in the AABO group (5.7% vs 16.7% in CIABO; p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in postpartum hemorrhage (14.3% vs 13.3%; p>0.05) or neonatal asphyxia (2.9% vs 3.3%; p>0.05). Postoperative coagulation function at 24 hours was better in the AABO group (p<0.05), with no significant difference in postoperative complications (p>0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AABO in cesarean deliveries for central placenta previa with placenta accreta reduces intraoperative blood loss and hysterectomy rates without adverse fetal effects, making it a valuable clinical option.</p>","PeriodicalId":14356,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Women's Health","volume":"17 ","pages":"1001-1008"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11994084/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Women's Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S512150","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of abdominal aortic balloon occlusion (AABO) and common iliac artery balloon occlusion (CIABO) in cesarean deliveries for central placenta previa with placenta accreta, using a retrospective study design.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 65 patients with central placenta previa and placenta accreta who underwent cesarean delivery at our hospital between January 2020 and April 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: the observation group (n=35) received AABO, while the control group (n=30) received CIABO. Outcomes compared included intraoperative blood loss, maternal and neonatal outcomes, and other relevant factors. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0, with normally distributed quantitative data assessed by t-tests and categorical data by chi-square tests. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results: The AABO group had significantly reduced balloon placement time, radiation exposure, intraoperative blood loss (mean 800 ± 150 mL vs 1200 ± 180 mL in CIABO; p<0.05), and transfusion volume (mean 400 ± 100 mL vs 600 ± 120 mL in CIABO; p<0.05). The hysterectomy rate was lower in the AABO group (5.7% vs 16.7% in CIABO; p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in postpartum hemorrhage (14.3% vs 13.3%; p>0.05) or neonatal asphyxia (2.9% vs 3.3%; p>0.05). Postoperative coagulation function at 24 hours was better in the AABO group (p<0.05), with no significant difference in postoperative complications (p>0.05).

Conclusion: AABO in cesarean deliveries for central placenta previa with placenta accreta reduces intraoperative blood loss and hysterectomy rates without adverse fetal effects, making it a valuable clinical option.

腹主动脉ABO (AABO)与髂总动脉ABO (CIABO)在中央前置胎盘伴增生胎盘剖宫产中的比较疗效:回顾性研究。
目的:采用回顾性研究设计,比较腹主动脉球囊闭塞术(AABO)与髂总动脉球囊闭塞术(CIABO)在中枢性前置胎盘合并增生性胎盘剖宫产术中的安全性和有效性。方法:回顾性分析2020年1月至2024年4月在我院行剖宫产术的65例中央前置胎盘和增生胎盘患者。将患者分为两组,观察组(35例)接受AABO,对照组(30例)接受CIABO。比较的结果包括术中出血量、产妇和新生儿结局以及其他相关因素。采用SPSS 26.0软件对数据进行分析,定量资料采用正态分布t检验,分类资料采用卡方检验。A p值结果:AABO组明显减少球囊放置时间、辐射暴露、术中出血量(平均800±150 mL比CIABO组1200±180 mL;P0.05)或新生儿窒息(2.9% vs 3.3%;p > 0.05)。AABO组术后24小时凝血功能更佳(p0.05)。结论:AABO在中枢性前置胎盘伴增生胎盘剖宫产术中可减少术中出血量和子宫切除率,且无不良胎儿效应,是一种有价值的临床选择。
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
International Journal of Women's Health
International Journal of Women's Health OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
194
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Women''s Health is an international, peer-reviewed, open access, online journal. Publishing original research, reports, editorials, reviews and commentaries on all aspects of women''s healthcare including gynecology, obstetrics, and breast cancer. Subject areas include: Chronic conditions including cancers of various organs specific and not specific to women Migraine, headaches, arthritis, osteoporosis Endocrine and autoimmune syndromes - asthma, multiple sclerosis, lupus, diabetes Sexual and reproductive health including fertility patterns and emerging technologies to address infertility Infectious disease with chronic sequelae including HIV/AIDS, HPV, PID, and other STDs Psychological and psychosocial conditions - depression across the life span, substance abuse, domestic violence Health maintenance among aging females - factors affecting the quality of life including physical, social and mental issues Avenues for health promotion and disease prevention across the life span Male vs female incidence comparisons for conditions that affect both genders.
×
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