兇險(xiǎn)型前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦與妊娠結(jié)局相關(guān)性研究

1、兇險(xiǎn)型前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦與妊娠結(jié)局相關(guān)性研究?jī)措U(xiǎn)型前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦與妊娠結(jié)局相關(guān)性研究滕莉姿李敏[摘要]目的研究?jī)措U(xiǎn)型前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦與產(chǎn)前出血及妊娠結(jié)局相關(guān)性。方法回顧性分析該院2014年3月—2017年3月收治的138例前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦，其中86例兇險(xiǎn)型前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦（觀察組）和52例普通型前置胎盤(pán)產(chǎn)婦（對(duì)照組），統(tǒng)計(jì)觀察組和對(duì)照組一般臨床資料、合并癥發(fā)生情況、圍術(shù)期情況和妊娠結(jié)局情況。結(jié)果①觀察組平均年齡（35.62.5）歲，平均孕周（36.131.

2、35）周，對(duì)照組平均年齡（33.13.7）歲，平均孕周（36.090.95）周，兩組產(chǎn)婦在平均年齡和平均孕周方面差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（t=0.465、1.325，P=0.965、0.068）；②觀察組流產(chǎn)次數(shù)（1.350.65）次、對(duì)照組流產(chǎn)次數(shù)（0.380.013）次，兩組相比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（t=3.512，P=0.039）；觀察組懷孕次數(shù)（1.970.29）次，對(duì)照組懷孕次數(shù)（0.490.38）次，兩組相比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（t=1.6

3、28，P=0.046）；③觀察組產(chǎn)后產(chǎn)褥感染發(fā)生率22.09%，對(duì)照組發(fā)生率28.84%，兩組相比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（χ2=19.512，P=0.059）；觀察組膀胱損傷發(fā)生率8.14%，對(duì)照組9.61%，兩組相比差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（χ2=10.687，P=0.061）；觀察組盆腔粘連發(fā)生率45.35%，對(duì)照組13.46%，兩組相比差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（χ2=2.344，P=0.001）。④觀察組手術(shù)持續(xù)時(shí)間（1.690.05）h、對(duì)照組（0.

4、980.18）h，兩組相比差異無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義（t=1.669，P=0.018）；觀察組出血量（609.859.65）mL，對(duì)照組（358.415.22）mL，兩組相比無(wú)差異numberofabtionsinthecontrolgroupwas（0.380.013）times.Therewasasignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups（t=3.512，P=0.039）.Thenumberofpregn

5、ancyintheobservationgroupwas（1.970.29）times，thenumberofpregnancyinthecontrolgroupwas（0.490.38）times.Therewasasignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups（t=1.628，P=0.046）.3.Theincidenceofpostpartumpuerperalinfectionwas22.09%

6、intheobservationgroup28.84%inthecontrolgroup.Therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups（χ2=19.512，P=0.059）.Theincidenceofbladderinjuryintheobservationgroupwas8.14%，9.61%，therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenthet

7、wogroups（χ2=10.687，P=0.061）；theincidenceofpelvicadhesionsintheobservationgroupwas45.35%，thatinthecontrolgroupwas13.46%.Therewasasignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups（χ2=2.344，P=0.001）.4.Thedurationofoperationintheobse

8、rvationgroupwas（1.690.05）hthecontrolgroupwas（0.980.18）h.Therewassignificantdifferencebetweenthetwogroups（t=1.669，P=0.018）.Thebleedingvolumeoftheobservationgroupwas（609.859.65）mL，thecontrolgroupwas（358.415.22）mL，therewasn