Current status of uterine rupture: a multi-center survey in China
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529?567x.2019.06.002
- VernacularTitle:全国多中心子宫破裂现状调查及结局分析
- Author:
Zhe LIU
1
;
Huixia YANG
;
Hong XIN
;
Shihong CUI
;
Hongbo QI
;
Weishe ZHANG
Author Information
1. 北京大学第一医院妇产科100034
- Keywords:
Uterine rupture;
Risk factors;
Cesarean section;
Cicatrix;
Multicenter study
- From:
Chinese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
2019;54(6):363-368
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the current status of uterine rupture in pregnant women in China and analyze the impacts of different surgical histories on the pregnancy outcomes of pregnant women with uterine rupture. Methods The clinical records and pregnancy outcomes of 84 uterine rupture cases were collected and analyzed retrospectively. All cases came from 21 hospitals of 13 provinces (or municipality) in China, dated from January 1st 2014 to December 31st 2015. The total deliveries were 283 614 during the period. For 84 pregnant women with symptomatic uterine rupture, the impacts of different surgical histories on pregnancy outcomes were compared and the results were statistically analyzed.Results (1) Totally, 84 cases of uterine rupture were with symptoms and diagnosed. The median age, median gestational age were 32.5 years old (23.0-44.0 years old) and 35.7 weeks (9.3-41.0 weeks), respectively. The incidence of uterine rupture was 0.03%(84/283 614). The proportion of patients with cesarean section history was 66.7% (56/84). The proportion of patients with other gynecological surgery history was 20.2%(17/84). (2)Compared with the group of cesarean section history, the group with other gynecological surgery history had a significant increase in complete uterine rupture (16/17 vs 66.1%, P<0.05). Meanwhile, regarding the massive blood transfusion (red blood cell transfusion≥1 000 ml) in the treatment of uterine rupture, patients with other gynecological surgery history had significant more cases than the group with cesarean section history (9/17 vs 23.2%, P<0.05). There was no statistical difference for the other outcomes. Compared with the patients with cesarean section history, the rate of hysterectomy was higher in the group without major surgery history when uterine rupture happened (4/11 vs 7.1%, P<0.05). The incidence of postpartum hemorrhage significantly increased in patients without major surgery history, compared with those with cesarean section (8/11 vs 28.6%, P<0.05). There were no statistic difference for other outcomes.(3) Patients with uterine rupture in the non-abdominal pain group had a significantly increased risk of massive blood transfusion (5/8 vs 27.6%, P<0.05),and the incidence of neonatal asphyxia and hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (4/7 vs 22.2%, P<0.05) were significantly increased. There were no significant difference between two groups regarding the other outcomes, such as preoperative diagnosis, complete rupture of uterus, hysterectomy, postpartum hemorrhage, shock, intrauterine fetal death or neonatal death, admission to neonatal ICU. Conclusions In addition to considering cesarean section history as one of the known risk factors, patients with non-cesarean section uterine surgery history should also be considered. The management of these patients should be strengthened during their pregnancy and delivery. There might be much more dangerous maternal and neonatal outcomes for the patients with uterine rupture who does not have any abdominal pain during pregnancy and delivery. To reduce the incidence of severe complications, uterine rupture should be diagnosed earlier. The early recognition and diagnosis of uterine rupture helps to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes.
