摘要
目的比较2种剖宫产下段不同术式的优缺点。方法对试产失败后剖宫产术患者240例随机分为2组,子宫下段锐性切开剖宫产术(试验组)120例与同期子宫下段钝性撕开剖宫产术组(对照组)120例比较,2种术式均采用腰麻或硬膜外麻醉及皮内缝合。比较2组手术时间、术中出血量、术中并发症,术后排气时间、术后病率、切口愈合情况、住院时间。结果试验组手术时间、出血量和手术切口撕裂率明显低于对照组(P<0.01),术后病率、切口延期愈合、平均住院时间均短于对照组(P<0.01)。术后排气时间2组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论试产失败后剖宫产术子宫下段锐性剪开术式有较多的优势,值得推广。
Objective To compare the advantages and disadvantages of two methods of cesarean section. Methods A total of 240 cases of cesarean section after natural childbirth failure were randomly divided into two groups. There were 120 cases in test group ,the lower uterine segment was incised sharply when cesarean section was performed, and 120 cases in control group, the lower segment uterine was teared bluntly. All the patients were spinal or epidural anesthesia and intradermal suture. The operation time, blood loss, intraoperative complications, postoperative discharge time, postoperative morbidity, wound healing and hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Results Operation time, blood loss and the incision tear rate in test group were significantly lower than those in control group （ P 〈 O. O1 ） Postoperative complication rate, delayed healing , hospital stay were shorter than those of the control group （P 〈 0. 01 ） ;There were significant differences in postoperative discharge time between the two groups （P 〈 0. 01 ）. Conclusion Sharp incision of the lower uterine segment in cesarean section after natural childbirth failure have more advantages, it is worth popularizing.
出处
《河北医科大学学报》
CAS
2011年第9期1018-1020,共3页
Journal of Hebei Medical University
关键词
剖宫产术
分娩并发症
配对分析
cesarean section
obstetric labor complications
matched - pair analysis
