International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2023
Is prophylactic intraoperative abdominal aortic balloon occlusion beneficial in pregnancies with placenta previa and placenta accreta spectrum during cesarean section? A 5-year retrospective study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Zi-Xuan, Zhao Yi-Fan, Li Lin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether prophylactic intraoperative abdominal aortic balloon occlusion (IAABO) is indeed beneficial in pregnancies with placenta previa (PP) and placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) during cesarean section.
METHODS: A retrospective case-control study included 251 pregnancies with PP and/or PAS. All enrolled patients were divided into a PP/PAS group, a PP + PAS group, and an IAABO group. The demographic characteristics and maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in blood loss and transfusion between the IAABO group and the PP + PAS group (P > 0.05). However, blood loss and red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma transfusion in the above two groups were significantly higher than in the PP/PAS group (P < 0.05). More pregnancies in the IAABO group had to undergo uterine artery embolization (29.2%) or hysterectomy (20.8%), and this percentage was significantly higher than that in the other two groups (P < 0.001). All neonatal characteristics did not show differences between the IAABO group and PP + PAS group (P > 0.05). IAABO led to femoral artery thrombosis in three cases and minor postoperative renal injury in one case.
CONCLUSION: IAABO only acted as a less important supporting technique during cesarean section. There was no evidence suggesting that IAABO could significantly control the massive hemorrhage in pregnancies with PP and PAS during cesarean delivery.
METHODS: A retrospective case-control study included 251 pregnancies with PP and/or PAS. All enrolled patients were divided into a PP/PAS group, a PP + PAS group, and an IAABO group. The demographic characteristics and maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in blood loss and transfusion between the IAABO group and the PP + PAS group (P > 0.05). However, blood loss and red blood cell and fresh frozen plasma transfusion in the above two groups were significantly higher than in the PP/PAS group (P < 0.05). More pregnancies in the IAABO group had to undergo uterine artery embolization (29.2%) or hysterectomy (20.8%), and this percentage was significantly higher than that in the other two groups (P < 0.001). All neonatal characteristics did not show differences between the IAABO group and PP + PAS group (P > 0.05). IAABO led to femoral artery thrombosis in three cases and minor postoperative renal injury in one case.
CONCLUSION: IAABO only acted as a less important supporting technique during cesarean section. There was no evidence suggesting that IAABO could significantly control the massive hemorrhage in pregnancies with PP and PAS during cesarean delivery.