Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2010
A randomized controlled study investigating the necessity of routine cervical dilatation during elective cesarean section.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Tosun Miğraci, Sakinci Mehmet, Celik Handan, Torumtay Burcu, Yazici Eren, Alper Tayfun, Malatyalioğlu Erdal
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate if it was necessary to dilate the cervix routinely during elective cesarean section and to determine the effects of this traditional maneuver on maternal morbidity.
METHODS: A total of 150 patients meeting eligibility criteria were enrolled in this prospective, randomized controlled study. Patients were allocated randomly into cervical dilatation group or non-dilated group. In the cervical dilatation group, the surgeon performed cervical dilatation by inserting a double-gloved index finger into the cervical canal of the patients after extraction of placenta and membranes. Endometrial cavity thickness of the patients at postoperative 24 h, development of postoperative febrile-infectious morbidity and postoperative hemoglobin levels were evaluated and compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The two groups were comparable with regard to demographic and clinical properties. Mean postoperative endometrial cavity thickness of the dilated group was significantly less than the non-dilated group (6.87 ± 2.50, 9.51 ± 3.35 respectively, p < 0.0001). The level of hemoglobin reduction was comparable between the groups (p = 0.37). Febrile morbidity was seen in one patient in the dilated group. Endometritis or wound infection was not encountered in either group during the puerperium.
CONCLUSIONS: Cervical dilatation seems to be an unnecessary intervention during the cesarean section.
METHODS: A total of 150 patients meeting eligibility criteria were enrolled in this prospective, randomized controlled study. Patients were allocated randomly into cervical dilatation group or non-dilated group. In the cervical dilatation group, the surgeon performed cervical dilatation by inserting a double-gloved index finger into the cervical canal of the patients after extraction of placenta and membranes. Endometrial cavity thickness of the patients at postoperative 24 h, development of postoperative febrile-infectious morbidity and postoperative hemoglobin levels were evaluated and compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The two groups were comparable with regard to demographic and clinical properties. Mean postoperative endometrial cavity thickness of the dilated group was significantly less than the non-dilated group (6.87 ± 2.50, 9.51 ± 3.35 respectively, p < 0.0001). The level of hemoglobin reduction was comparable between the groups (p = 0.37). Febrile morbidity was seen in one patient in the dilated group. Endometritis or wound infection was not encountered in either group during the puerperium.
CONCLUSIONS: Cervical dilatation seems to be an unnecessary intervention during the cesarean section.