剖宫产术后再次剖宫产的风险因素。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Natav Hendin, Liron Seidman, Yossi Geron, Gil Zeevi, Eran Hadar, Asnat Walfisch, Ohad Houri
{"title":"剖宫产术后再次剖宫产的风险因素。","authors":"Natav Hendin, Liron Seidman, Yossi Geron, Gil Zeevi, Eran Hadar, Asnat Walfisch, Ohad Houri","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.15979","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify and analyze risk factors associated with relaparotomy following cesarean delivery (CD), focusing on obstetric and surgical parameters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective case-control study conducted at a high-volume tertiary obstetric center. We reviewed all women who underwent CD between 2013 and 2023. Patients who required a relaparotomy, defined as the reopening of the fascia, were included in the study group. Patient data were systematically reviewed to identify potential risk factors contributing to the need for post-CD relaparotomy, compared with a control group that did not undergo a relaparotomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 11 465 women underwent CD, 59 (0.5%) required relaparotomy. Using a multivariate model for independent risk factors, we found the following to be associated with relaparotomy: emergency CD (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.78-5.38, P < 0.01), placenta previa (aOR 4.66, 95% CI 1.54-14.11, P < 0.01), and multiple gestation as indications for the CD (aOR 4.61, 95% CI 2.10-10.12, P < 0.01); estimated intraoperative blood loss of more than 1 L (aOR 5.98, 95% CI 2.79-12.80, P < 0.01); and intraoperative adhesions (aOR 7.12, 95% CI 4.06-12.48, P < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study underscores the multifactorial nature of relaparotomy after CD, emphasizing the significance of considering a broad array of risk factors. By identifying and understanding these factors, clinicians can optimize patient care and potentially reduce morbidity, particularly the need for subsequent surgical interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk factors for relaparotomy after cesarean delivery.\",\"authors\":\"Natav Hendin, Liron Seidman, Yossi Geron, Gil Zeevi, Eran Hadar, Asnat Walfisch, Ohad Houri\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ijgo.15979\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify and analyze risk factors associated with relaparotomy following cesarean delivery (CD), focusing on obstetric and surgical parameters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective case-control study conducted at a high-volume tertiary obstetric center. We reviewed all women who underwent CD between 2013 and 2023. Patients who required a relaparotomy, defined as the reopening of the fascia, were included in the study group. Patient data were systematically reviewed to identify potential risk factors contributing to the need for post-CD relaparotomy, compared with a control group that did not undergo a relaparotomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 11 465 women underwent CD, 59 (0.5%) required relaparotomy. Using a multivariate model for independent risk factors, we found the following to be associated with relaparotomy: emergency CD (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.78-5.38, P < 0.01), placenta previa (aOR 4.66, 95% CI 1.54-14.11, P < 0.01), and multiple gestation as indications for the CD (aOR 4.61, 95% CI 2.10-10.12, P < 0.01); estimated intraoperative blood loss of more than 1 L (aOR 5.98, 95% CI 2.79-12.80, P < 0.01); and intraoperative adhesions (aOR 7.12, 95% CI 4.06-12.48, P < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study underscores the multifactorial nature of relaparotomy after CD, emphasizing the significance of considering a broad array of risk factors. By identifying and understanding these factors, clinicians can optimize patient care and potentially reduce morbidity, particularly the need for subsequent surgical interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15979\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15979","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定并分析与剖宫产术后再次剖宫产相关的风险因素:识别并分析与剖宫产术后再次剖宫产相关的风险因素,重点关注产科和外科参数:方法:在一家高容量三级产科中心进行的回顾性病例对照研究。我们回顾了 2013 年至 2023 年期间接受剖宫产的所有产妇。研究组中包括需要再次剖腹探查术的患者,再次剖腹探查术的定义是重新打开筋膜。研究人员对患者数据进行了系统性审查,以确定导致CD术后需要进行再开腹手术的潜在风险因素,并与未进行再开腹手术的对照组进行比较:在11 465名接受CD手术的女性中,有59人(0.5%)需要再次剖腹探查术。通过对独立风险因素进行多变量模型分析,我们发现以下因素与再次剖腹探查术有关:急诊 CD(调整赔率比 [aOR] 3.09,95% 置信区间 [CI] 1.78-5.38,P 结论:我们的研究强调了再次剖腹探查术的多因素影响:我们的研究强调了 CD 后再次剖腹探查术的多因素性质,强调了考虑一系列风险因素的重要性。通过识别和了解这些因素,临床医生可以优化患者护理,并有可能降低发病率,尤其是对后续手术干预的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk factors for relaparotomy after cesarean delivery.

Objective: To identify and analyze risk factors associated with relaparotomy following cesarean delivery (CD), focusing on obstetric and surgical parameters.

Methods: Retrospective case-control study conducted at a high-volume tertiary obstetric center. We reviewed all women who underwent CD between 2013 and 2023. Patients who required a relaparotomy, defined as the reopening of the fascia, were included in the study group. Patient data were systematically reviewed to identify potential risk factors contributing to the need for post-CD relaparotomy, compared with a control group that did not undergo a relaparotomy.

Results: Out of 11 465 women underwent CD, 59 (0.5%) required relaparotomy. Using a multivariate model for independent risk factors, we found the following to be associated with relaparotomy: emergency CD (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.78-5.38, P < 0.01), placenta previa (aOR 4.66, 95% CI 1.54-14.11, P < 0.01), and multiple gestation as indications for the CD (aOR 4.61, 95% CI 2.10-10.12, P < 0.01); estimated intraoperative blood loss of more than 1 L (aOR 5.98, 95% CI 2.79-12.80, P < 0.01); and intraoperative adhesions (aOR 7.12, 95% CI 4.06-12.48, P < 0.01).

Conclusions: Our study underscores the multifactorial nature of relaparotomy after CD, emphasizing the significance of considering a broad array of risk factors. By identifying and understanding these factors, clinicians can optimize patient care and potentially reduce morbidity, particularly the need for subsequent surgical interventions.

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
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
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