胎儿呈现对26143例双胎妊娠分娩方式的影响:一项基于31年真实世界数据的全国性人群观察性研究。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Meryam Sugulle, Katariina Laine, Tiril Tingleff, Gulim Murzakanova, Sari Räisänen
{"title":"胎儿呈现对26143例双胎妊娠分娩方式的影响:一项基于31年真实世界数据的全国性人群观察性研究。","authors":"Meryam Sugulle, Katariina Laine, Tiril Tingleff, Gulim Murzakanova, Sari Räisänen","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.70103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe the rate of combinations of fetal lies and presentations in twin pregnancies at delivery and to assess the effects of fetal lies and presentations on mode of delivery as well as fetal and maternal birth outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This population-based cohort study used real-world data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and included all twin births (n = 26 143) in Norway during 1988-2018. Logistic Regression Analysis was Applied. Main outcome measures were planned and actual modes of delivery categorized into vaginal deliveries and cesarean sections. Secondary outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage and intrapartum stillbirth.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most twin births were planned as vaginal deliveries (83.4%, 21 811/26 143), of which (65.9%, 14 371/21 811) were successful. Vaginal delivery was more often successful in parous than in nulliparous women, or if the first or both twins were in cephalic presentation compared with non-cephalic presentation of the first or both twins. Planned cesarean section was more likely to be chosen if the first or both twins were in non-cephalic presentation than if they were in cephalic presentation. Maternal parity, demographic and obstetric risk factors had little or no effect on the association between twin presentations and planned or actual delivery mode.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>More than half of women with a twin pregnancy had a successful vaginal delivery. Keeping the option of the vaginal route as the primary mode of delivery in a twin pregnancy maintains the right of the woman to have a vaginal delivery and avoid a uterine scar.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of fetal presentation on mode of delivery in 26 143 twin pregnancies: A nationwide, population-based observational study of 31-year real-world data.\",\"authors\":\"Meryam Sugulle, Katariina Laine, Tiril Tingleff, Gulim Murzakanova, Sari Räisänen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ijgo.70103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe the rate of combinations of fetal lies and presentations in twin pregnancies at delivery and to assess the effects of fetal lies and presentations on mode of delivery as well as fetal and maternal birth outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This population-based cohort study used real-world data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and included all twin births (n = 26 143) in Norway during 1988-2018. Logistic Regression Analysis was Applied. Main outcome measures were planned and actual modes of delivery categorized into vaginal deliveries and cesarean sections. Secondary outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage and intrapartum stillbirth.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most twin births were planned as vaginal deliveries (83.4%, 21 811/26 143), of which (65.9%, 14 371/21 811) were successful. Vaginal delivery was more often successful in parous than in nulliparous women, or if the first or both twins were in cephalic presentation compared with non-cephalic presentation of the first or both twins. Planned cesarean section was more likely to be chosen if the first or both twins were in non-cephalic presentation than if they were in cephalic presentation. Maternal parity, demographic and obstetric risk factors had little or no effect on the association between twin presentations and planned or actual delivery mode.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>More than half of women with a twin pregnancy had a successful vaginal delivery. Keeping the option of the vaginal route as the primary mode of delivery in a twin pregnancy maintains the right of the woman to have a vaginal delivery and avoid a uterine scar.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-29\",\"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.70103\",\"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.70103","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:描述双胎妊娠分娩时胎儿胎位和胎位组合的比率,并评估胎儿胎位和胎位对分娩方式以及胎儿和产妇分娩结局的影响。方法:这项基于人群的队列研究使用了挪威医学出生登记处的真实数据,包括1988-2018年期间挪威所有双胞胎出生(n = 26143)。采用Logistic回归分析。主要结局指标为计划和实际分娩方式,分为阴道分娩和剖宫产。次要结局为产后出血和产时死产。结果:多数双胞胎采用顺产方式分娩(83.4%,21 811/26 143),其中成功分娩(65.9%,14 371/21 811)。阴道分娩在有产妇女中比在无产妇女中更成功,或者如果第一个或两个双胞胎是头位与非头位的第一个或两个双胞胎相比。如果第一个或两个双胞胎是在非头位比如果他们是在头位更可能选择计划剖宫产。产妇胎次、人口统计学和产科风险因素对双胞胎出生与计划或实际分娩方式之间的关联影响很小或没有影响。结论:超过一半的双胎妊娠妇女阴道分娩成功。在双胎妊娠中,保留阴道分娩作为主要分娩方式的选择,维护了妇女阴道分娩和避免子宫疤痕的权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of fetal presentation on mode of delivery in 26 143 twin pregnancies: A nationwide, population-based observational study of 31-year real-world data.

Objective: To describe the rate of combinations of fetal lies and presentations in twin pregnancies at delivery and to assess the effects of fetal lies and presentations on mode of delivery as well as fetal and maternal birth outcomes.

Methods: This population-based cohort study used real-world data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and included all twin births (n = 26 143) in Norway during 1988-2018. Logistic Regression Analysis was Applied. Main outcome measures were planned and actual modes of delivery categorized into vaginal deliveries and cesarean sections. Secondary outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage and intrapartum stillbirth.

Results: Most twin births were planned as vaginal deliveries (83.4%, 21 811/26 143), of which (65.9%, 14 371/21 811) were successful. Vaginal delivery was more often successful in parous than in nulliparous women, or if the first or both twins were in cephalic presentation compared with non-cephalic presentation of the first or both twins. Planned cesarean section was more likely to be chosen if the first or both twins were in non-cephalic presentation than if they were in cephalic presentation. Maternal parity, demographic and obstetric risk factors had little or no effect on the association between twin presentations and planned or actual delivery mode.

Conclusions: More than half of women with a twin pregnancy had a successful vaginal delivery. Keeping the option of the vaginal route as the primary mode of delivery in a twin pregnancy maintains the right of the woman to have a vaginal delivery and avoid a uterine scar.

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