|
|
|
| Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Perinatal Outcomes of PPROM Puerperae At Different Visit Times |
| Song Ruili |
| Henan Staff Hospital,Zhengzhou 450000,China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To compare the clinical outcomes and perinatal outcomes of PPROM puerperae at different visit times,so as to provide evidence for clinical guidance. Methods The clinical data of 130 cases of PPROM puerperae and their newborns in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively.And they were divided into 75 cases with clinic time less than 2h（α group）,44 cases with clinic time of 2 to 12h（β group）,and 11 cases with clinic time more than 12h（γ group）according to the clinic time.The baseline data,delivery modes,clinical outcomes and perinatal outcomes were compared among the three groups. Results There were no statistically significant differences in the baseline data among the three groups（P>0.05）.In terms of delivery modes,there was no significant difference in vaginal shun yield,vaginal midwifery rate and caesarean section rate among the three groups（P>0.05）.In the maternal clinical outcomes,the incidence rate of intrauterine infection in γ group was significantly higher than that in α group（P<0.05）,and the incidence rate of puerperal infection in γ group was significantly higher than that in α and β groups（P<0.05）.In perinatal outcomes,the neonatal infection rate in α and β groups was significantly lower than that in γ group（P<0.05）,and there was no significant difference in the neonatal infection rate between α group and β group（P>0.05）.NRDS incidence rate in α group were significantly lower than those in β and γ groups（P<0.05）,and there was no significant difference in NRDS incidence rate between β group and γ group（P>0.05）.There was no significant difference in the average birth weight among the three groups（P>0.05）. Conclusion PPROM puerperae have different pregnancy outcomes owing to different clinic time,and standardized treatment for patients within 2h of clinic time can effectively improve maternal-infant outcomes.
|
|
Received: 10 December 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 郑亮慧,陈素清,刘照贞,等.未足月胎膜早破期待治疗时间的影响因素及意义[J].中国妇产科临床杂志,2015,16(4):329-332.
[2] 姜大景,胡婷婷,汪华,等.多模式CT指导下静脉和动脉溶栓治疗急性脑梗死的效果和安全性比较[J].中国CT和MRI杂志,2016,14(3):38-40.
[3] 刘月华. 未足月胎膜早破与微生物入侵导致菌群失调的临床相关性分析[J].重庆医学,2016,45(32):4575-4576.
[4] 王志坚,芮塬.脐带脱垂的预防及处理[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2016,32(12):1182-1185.
[5] 郭芳,朱进秋,罗维真,等.挤压脐带胎盘输血方法对极低出生体质量儿的影响[J].临床儿科杂志,2015,33(3):211-213.
[6] 夏洁,马剑鸣.潜伏期对不同孕周未足月胎膜早破围产儿结局的影响及其意义[J].山东医药,2016,56(20):65-67.
[7] 白宇翔,漆洪波.妊娠34周前胎膜早破的处理[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2014,30(6):410-413.
[8] 徐爱云. 保胎治疗对于妊娠34周以下胎膜早破临床干预效果观察[J].中国卫生标准管理,2017,8(20):68-69. |
| [1] |
Liu Weihong. Clinical Analysis of Hysteroscopic Mediastinectomy in the Treatment of Incomplete Mediastinum[J]. journal1, 2022, 42(1): 45-46. |
| [2] |
. [J]. journal1, 2021, 41(4): 64-65. |
| [3] |
Luo Xiangyun, Hu Jiao, Gu Xiaoshan. Correlation Between Color Doppler Ultrasound Blood Flow Parameters and Pregnancy Outcome in Scar Uterus[J]. journal1, 2021, 41(3): 27-28. |
| [4] |
. [J]. journal1, 2021, 41(1): 56-57. |
|
|
|
|
2022, Vol. 42 
