BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2013
Maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to the instrument used for mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery: a prospective cohort study.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Bahl R, Van de Venne M, Macleod M, Strachan B, Murphy D J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with alternative instruments used to perform a mid-cavity rotational delivery.
DESIGN: A prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Two university teaching hospitals in Scotland and England.
POPULATION: Three hundred and eighty-one nulliparous women who had a mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery.
METHODS: A data collection sheet was completed by the research team following delivery.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postpartum haemorrhage, third- and fourth-degree perineal tears, low cord pH, neonatal trauma, and failed or sequential operative vaginal delivery.
RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three women (42.8%) underwent manual rotation followed by non-rotational forceps delivery, 73 (19.1%) had a rotational vacuum delivery, and 145 (38.1%) delivered with the assistance of rotational (Kielland) forceps. The rates of postpartum haemorrhage were similar when comparing manual rotation with rotational vacuum (adjusted OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.66-3.98), and when comparing manual rotation with Kielland forceps (adjusted OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.71-2.88). The results were comparable for third- and fourth-degree perineal tears (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.13-1.89; adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.39-1.82), low cord pH (adjusted OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.44-6.91; adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44-2.83), neonatal trauma (adjusted OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.16-1.55; adjusted OR 3.25, 95% CI 0.65-16.17), and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (adjusted OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.45-4.81; adjusted OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.49-2.19). The sequential use of instruments was less likely with manual rotation and forceps than with rotational vacuum delivery (0.6 versus 36.9%, OR 0.01, 95% CI 0.002-0.090).
CONCLUSIONS: Maternal and perinatal outcomes are comparable with Kielland forceps, vacuum extraction, and manual rotation, with few serious adverse outcomes. With appropriate training mid-cavity rotational delivery can be practiced safely, including the use of Kielland forceps.
DESIGN: A prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Two university teaching hospitals in Scotland and England.
POPULATION: Three hundred and eighty-one nulliparous women who had a mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery.
METHODS: A data collection sheet was completed by the research team following delivery.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postpartum haemorrhage, third- and fourth-degree perineal tears, low cord pH, neonatal trauma, and failed or sequential operative vaginal delivery.
RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three women (42.8%) underwent manual rotation followed by non-rotational forceps delivery, 73 (19.1%) had a rotational vacuum delivery, and 145 (38.1%) delivered with the assistance of rotational (Kielland) forceps. The rates of postpartum haemorrhage were similar when comparing manual rotation with rotational vacuum (adjusted OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.66-3.98), and when comparing manual rotation with Kielland forceps (adjusted OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.71-2.88). The results were comparable for third- and fourth-degree perineal tears (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.13-1.89; adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.39-1.82), low cord pH (adjusted OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.44-6.91; adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44-2.83), neonatal trauma (adjusted OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.16-1.55; adjusted OR 3.25, 95% CI 0.65-16.17), and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (adjusted OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.45-4.81; adjusted OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.49-2.19). The sequential use of instruments was less likely with manual rotation and forceps than with rotational vacuum delivery (0.6 versus 36.9%, OR 0.01, 95% CI 0.002-0.090).
CONCLUSIONS: Maternal and perinatal outcomes are comparable with Kielland forceps, vacuum extraction, and manual rotation, with few serious adverse outcomes. With appropriate training mid-cavity rotational delivery can be practiced safely, including the use of Kielland forceps.