The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2009
Incidence of post-operative adhesions following Misgav Ladach caesarean section--a comparative study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Fatusić Zlatan, Hudić Igor
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the incidence of peritoneal adhesions as a post-operative complication after caesarean section following the Misgav Ladach method and compare it with peritoneal adhesions following traditional caesarean section methods (Pfannenstiel-Dörffler, low midline laparotomy-Dörffler).
METHODS: The analysis is retrospective and is based on medical documentation of the Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina (data from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2005). We analysed previous caesarean section dependent on caesarean section method (200 by Misgav Ladach method, 100 by Pfannenstiel-Dörffler method and 100 caesarean section by low midline laparotomy-Dörffler). Adhesion scores were assigned using a previously validated scoring system.
RESULTS: We found statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in incidence of peritoneal adhesions in second and third caesarean section between Misgav Ladach method and the Pfannestiel-Dörffler and low midline laparotomy-Dörffler method. Difference in incidence of peritoneal adhesions between low midline laparotomy-Dörffler and Pfannenstiel-Dörffler method was not statistically different (p > 0.05). The mean pelvic adhesion score was statistically lower in Misgav Ladach group (0.43 +/- 0.79) than the mean score in the Pfannestiel-Dörffler (0.71 +/- 1.27) and low midline laparotomy-Dörffler groups (0.99 +/- 1.49) (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that Misgav Ladach method of caesarean section makes possible lower incidence of peritoneal adhesions as post-operative complication of previous caesarean section.
METHODS: The analysis is retrospective and is based on medical documentation of the Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina (data from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2005). We analysed previous caesarean section dependent on caesarean section method (200 by Misgav Ladach method, 100 by Pfannenstiel-Dörffler method and 100 caesarean section by low midline laparotomy-Dörffler). Adhesion scores were assigned using a previously validated scoring system.
RESULTS: We found statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in incidence of peritoneal adhesions in second and third caesarean section between Misgav Ladach method and the Pfannestiel-Dörffler and low midline laparotomy-Dörffler method. Difference in incidence of peritoneal adhesions between low midline laparotomy-Dörffler and Pfannenstiel-Dörffler method was not statistically different (p > 0.05). The mean pelvic adhesion score was statistically lower in Misgav Ladach group (0.43 +/- 0.79) than the mean score in the Pfannestiel-Dörffler (0.71 +/- 1.27) and low midline laparotomy-Dörffler groups (0.99 +/- 1.49) (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that Misgav Ladach method of caesarean section makes possible lower incidence of peritoneal adhesions as post-operative complication of previous caesarean section.