首页|前置胎盘妊娠中期引产方式的对比分析

前置胎盘妊娠中期引产方式的对比分析

Comparative analysis of induced labor in the second trimester of placenta previa

扫码查看
目的 通过临床对比分析前置胎盘妊娠中期不同引产方式的引产结局.方法 选取 2018 年 1 月至 2020 年12 月郑州大学第三附属医院收治的前置胎盘妊娠中期引产患者 130 例为研究对象.根据引产方式分为米非司酮+米索前列醇组(45 例)、米非司酮+乳酸依沙吖啶羊膜腔注射组(58 例)、剖宫取胎组(27 例);根据前置胎盘类型分为完全前置胎盘组(19例)及非完全前置胎盘组(111例).对比分析各组引产结局.结果 ①三组患者年龄、孕次、剖宫产次数比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).剖宫取胎组患者孕周及前置胎盘类型大于其他两组,生产次数多于其他两组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05).剖宫取胎组患者分娩期出血量、产后出血率、输血率、胎盘植入率均高于其他两组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05).三组患者血清HCG恢复时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).②完全前置胎盘组与非完全前置胎盘组患者依沙吖啶使用率、剖宫取胎率、胎盘植入率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);而完全前置胎盘组米索使用率低于非完全前置胎盘组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).完全前置胎盘组患者分娩期出血量高于非完全性前置胎盘组患者,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).③合并胎盘植入患者,剖宫取胎组患者分娩期出血量多于经阴道分娩组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).两组患者住院天数、产后出血率、胎盘残留率、产后输血率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 3种引产方式各有利弊,结合患者实际情况选择更合适的引产方式改善患者预后.
Objective The results of induced labor in the second trimester of placenta previa pregnancy were analyzed through clinical comparison.Methods A total of 130 patients with placenta previa induced labor in the second trimester of pregnancy admitted to the Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 2018 to December 2020 were selected as the study objects.They were divided into mifepristone + misoprostol group(45 cases),mifepristone + ethacridine lactate amniotic injection group(58 cases)and hysterotomy group(27 cases).According to the types of placenta previa,they were divided into complete placenta previa group(19 cases)and incomplete placenta previa group(111 cases).The induced labor outcome of each group was compared and analyzed.Results ① There were no significant differences in age,pregnancy times and cesarean section times among the three groups(P>0.05).The gestational age and placenta previa type of patients in hysterectomy group were higher than those in the other two groups,and the number of births was higher than those in the other two groups,with statistical significance(P<0.05).The delivery blood loss,postpartum bleeding rate,blood transfusion rate and placenta implantation rate in the hysterectomy group were higher than those in the other two groups,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the recovery time of serum HCG among the three groups(P>0.05).② There was no significant difference in the utilization rate,hysterectomy rate and placenta implantation rate between complete placenta previa group and non-complete placenta previa group(P>0.05).The utilization rate of misol in complete placenta previa group was lower than that in non-complete placenta previa group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The blood loss during delivery of complete placenta previa was higher than that of incomplete placenta previa,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).(3)In patients with placenta implantation,the amount of blood loss during delivery in the hysterectomy group was higher than that in the vaginal delivery group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).There were no significant differences in hospitalization days,postpartum hemorrhage rate,placenta residual rate and postpartum blood transfusion rate between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion The three induced labor methods have their own advantages and disadvantages,and the more appropriate induction method can improve the prognosis of patients according to the actual situation of patients.

Second trimesterPlacental previaInduction of labour

张钦山、常丰华、高雅、吕杰

展开 >

450000 河南省郑州市,郑州大学第三附属医院妇产科

妊娠中期 胎盘前置状态 引产

2024

现代养生
河北省医疗气功医院

现代养生

影响因子:1.355
ISSN:1671-0223
年,卷(期):2024.24(10)
  • 11