真空抽吸失败。产妇危险因素与妊娠结局。

E. Sheiner, I. Shoham-Vardi, T. Silberstein, M. Hallak, M. Katz, M. Mazor
{"title":"真空抽吸失败。产妇危险因素与妊娠结局。","authors":"E. Sheiner, I. Shoham-Vardi, T. Silberstein, M. Hallak, M. Katz, M. Mazor","doi":"10.1097/00006254-200203000-00009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nTo evaluate obstetric risk factors associated with a failed trial of vacuum extraction and to assess its pregnancy outcome.\n\n\nSTUDY DESIGN\nAll attempted vacuum extractions between the years 1990 and 1998 were identified, and a comparison of successful and failed trials of vacuum extraction in singleton, vertex deliveries was performed.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf 2,111 trials of vacuum extraction, 113 (5.4%) cases were complicated by failed extraction and underwent cesarean section. Those neonates were significantly more likely to be large for gestational age, specifically to weigh > 4,000 g as compared to the controls. Patients lacking prenatal care had significantly higher rates of failed vacuum extraction trials. While cervical and uterine tears were rather rare, parturients who had failed trials of vacuum extraction had significantly higher rates of cervical and uterine tears as compared to those with successful vacuum extractions. This association remained significant after controlling for a previous cesarean section using the Mantel-Hanszel technique. Women from the failed vacuum extraction group had significantly higher rates of postpartum anemia. Pregnancies complicated by failed vacuum extraction had significantly higher rates of intrapartum and postpartum fetal death. Those neonates had significantly higher rates of Apgar scores < 7 at one and five minutes.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nFailed trial of vacuum extraction is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Risk factors associated with such failures are fetal weight and lack of prenatal care. Thus, careful estimation of fetal weight should be performed before the procedure, and estimated fetal weight > 4,000 g might be considered a relative contraindication to vacuum extraction, especially among patients who did not have prenatal care.","PeriodicalId":192418,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"46","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Failed vacuum extraction. Maternal risk factors and pregnancy outcome.\",\"authors\":\"E. Sheiner, I. Shoham-Vardi, T. Silberstein, M. Hallak, M. Katz, M. Mazor\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/00006254-200203000-00009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\nTo evaluate obstetric risk factors associated with a failed trial of vacuum extraction and to assess its pregnancy outcome.\\n\\n\\nSTUDY DESIGN\\nAll attempted vacuum extractions between the years 1990 and 1998 were identified, and a comparison of successful and failed trials of vacuum extraction in singleton, vertex deliveries was performed.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nOf 2,111 trials of vacuum extraction, 113 (5.4%) cases were complicated by failed extraction and underwent cesarean section. Those neonates were significantly more likely to be large for gestational age, specifically to weigh > 4,000 g as compared to the controls. Patients lacking prenatal care had significantly higher rates of failed vacuum extraction trials. While cervical and uterine tears were rather rare, parturients who had failed trials of vacuum extraction had significantly higher rates of cervical and uterine tears as compared to those with successful vacuum extractions. This association remained significant after controlling for a previous cesarean section using the Mantel-Hanszel technique. Women from the failed vacuum extraction group had significantly higher rates of postpartum anemia. Pregnancies complicated by failed vacuum extraction had significantly higher rates of intrapartum and postpartum fetal death. Those neonates had significantly higher rates of Apgar scores < 7 at one and five minutes.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nFailed trial of vacuum extraction is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Risk factors associated with such failures are fetal weight and lack of prenatal care. Thus, careful estimation of fetal weight should be performed before the procedure, and estimated fetal weight > 4,000 g might be considered a relative contraindication to vacuum extraction, especially among patients who did not have prenatal care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":192418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of reproductive medicine\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"46\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of reproductive medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/00006254-200203000-00009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/00006254-200203000-00009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 46

摘要

目的评价与真空抽吸失败相关的产科危险因素,并评价其妊娠结局。研究设计确定1990年至1998年间所有尝试的真空抽吸,并对单胎、顶点分娩中真空抽吸的成功和失败试验进行比较。结果2111例患者中,113例(5.4%)因拔管失败而行剖宫产。与对照组相比,这些新生儿明显更有可能比胎龄大,特别是体重为40 000克。缺乏产前护理的患者真空抽吸试验失败率明显较高。虽然宫颈和子宫撕裂相当罕见,但与成功的宫颈和子宫撕裂相比,真空抽取试验失败的孕妇的宫颈和子宫撕裂率明显更高。在使用Mantel-Hanszel技术控制之前的剖宫产后,这种关联仍然显著。抽真空失败组的妇女产后贫血的发生率明显更高。妊娠合并失败的真空抽吸有显著较高的率产时和产后胎儿死亡。这些新生儿在1分钟和5分钟时Apgar评分< 7的比例明显更高。结论真空抽吸试验失败与不良母胎结局有关。与此类失败相关的危险因素是胎儿体重和缺乏产前护理。因此,在手术前应仔细估计胎儿体重,估计胎儿体重bbb40,000 g可能被认为是真空抽吸的相对禁忌症,特别是在没有产前护理的患者中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Failed vacuum extraction. Maternal risk factors and pregnancy outcome.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate obstetric risk factors associated with a failed trial of vacuum extraction and to assess its pregnancy outcome. STUDY DESIGN All attempted vacuum extractions between the years 1990 and 1998 were identified, and a comparison of successful and failed trials of vacuum extraction in singleton, vertex deliveries was performed. RESULTS Of 2,111 trials of vacuum extraction, 113 (5.4%) cases were complicated by failed extraction and underwent cesarean section. Those neonates were significantly more likely to be large for gestational age, specifically to weigh > 4,000 g as compared to the controls. Patients lacking prenatal care had significantly higher rates of failed vacuum extraction trials. While cervical and uterine tears were rather rare, parturients who had failed trials of vacuum extraction had significantly higher rates of cervical and uterine tears as compared to those with successful vacuum extractions. This association remained significant after controlling for a previous cesarean section using the Mantel-Hanszel technique. Women from the failed vacuum extraction group had significantly higher rates of postpartum anemia. Pregnancies complicated by failed vacuum extraction had significantly higher rates of intrapartum and postpartum fetal death. Those neonates had significantly higher rates of Apgar scores < 7 at one and five minutes. CONCLUSION Failed trial of vacuum extraction is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Risk factors associated with such failures are fetal weight and lack of prenatal care. Thus, careful estimation of fetal weight should be performed before the procedure, and estimated fetal weight > 4,000 g might be considered a relative contraindication to vacuum extraction, especially among patients who did not have prenatal care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信