KESAR KESISH AMALIYOTIDA BACHADONNI TIKISH USULINI TANLASHGA TA'SIR QILUVCHI OMILLAR: ANAMNESTIK MA'LUMOTLARNI TAHLIL QILISH
##article.subject##:
kesarcha kesish; bachadonni tikish; akusherlik anamnezi; ginekologik patologiya; ekstragenital kasalliklar.##article.abstract##
Kesarcha kesish operatsiyasidan keyin bachadonni tikish usulini tanlash asoratlar xavfini kamaytirishda muhim rol o‘ynaydi va keyingi reproduktiv natijalarga ta’sir qiladi. 18 dan 42 yoshgacha bo‘lgan 496 nafar ayol ishtirokida tadqiqot o‘tkazildi. Bemorlar bachadonni tikish usuliga qarab ikki guruhga bo‘lindi: 1-guruh – 240 (48%) nafar ayollar bachadonning modifikatsiyalangan tikish usuli bilan, 2-guruh – 256 (52%) nafar ayollar an’anaviy tikish usuli bilan. Anamnestik ma’lumotlarni tahlil qilishda birinchi kesarcha kesish operatsiyasiga ko‘rsatmalar, ekstragenital va ginekologik kasalliklar, shuningdek, ilgari o‘tkazilgan jarrohlik aralashuvlari baholandi. Olingan natijalar shuni ko‘rsatdiki, bachadonni tikish usulini tanlash ko‘p jihatdan bemorning somatik va akusherlik-ginekologik anamneziga bog‘liq bo‘lib, individual yondashuvni talab qiladi.
Библиографические ссылки
Betrán A.P., Ye J., Moller A.-B. et al. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990–2014. PLOS ONE. 2016; 11(2): e0148343.
Boerma T., Ronsmans C., Melesse D.Y. et al. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. The Lancet. 2018; 392(10155): 1341–1348.
Di Spiezio Sardo A., Saccone G., McCurdy R. et al. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2017; 217(5): 463–472.
Vikhareva Osser O., Valentin L. Risk factors for incomplete healing of the uterine incision after caesarean section. BJOG. 2010; 117(9): 1119–1126.
Bujold E., Goyet M., Marcoux S., Brassard N., Cormier B. The role of uterine closure in the risk of uterine rupture. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010; 116(1): 43–50.
Vachon-Marceau C., Demers S., Bujold E. et al. Single versus double-layer uterine closure at cesarean: impact on lower uterine segment thickness at next pregnancy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2017; 217(1): 65.e1–65.e5.
Stegwee S.I., Malotaux A.M., Huirne J.A., Van den Berg L.A., Lambalk C.B., Hink E. Uterine caesarean closure techniques affect ultrasound findings and maternal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018; 51(2): 165–175.
Babu R., Magon N. Single versus double-layer uterine closure at cesarean: impact on uterine scar thickness and reproductive outcomes. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of India. 2021; 71(1): 34–40.
Stegwee S.I., van den Tweel M.M., Malotaux A.M. et al. The impact of single- vs double-layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019; 221(5): 437–448.
Pomorski M., Fuchs T., Zimmer M. The risk factors of uterine scar dehiscence and rupture – literature review. Ginekologia Polska. 2019; 90(4): 195–202.
Roberge S., Demers S., Bujold E. Impact of uterine closure on residual myometrial thickness after cesarean: a randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016; 215(4): 507.e1–507.e6.
Hayakawa H., Itakura A., Mitsui T. et al. Methods for assessing the thickness of the lower uterine segment in pregnant women with previous cesarean delivery. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2006; 85(4): 490–494.
Hayakawa H., Kinoshita K., Kanayama N. et al. Sonographic evaluation of the lower uterine segment during pregnancy: a comparison of transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasonography. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research. 2011; 37(2): 93–99.
Rozenberg P., Goffinet F., Phillippe H.J. et al. Ultrasonographic measurement of lower uterine segment thickness and risk of uterine rupture. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1996; 87(4): 597–601.
Jastrow N., Roberge S., Gauthier R.J. et al. Impact of single- vs double-layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019; 221(5): 437.e1–437.e13.
Roberge S., Chaillet N., Boutin A. et al. Single- vs double-layer closure of the hysterotomy incision during cesarean delivery and risk of uterine rupture. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2014; 211(5): 500.e1–500.e10.
Betrán A.P., Torloni M.R., Zhang J.J., Gülmezoglu A.M. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG. 2016; 123(5): 667–670.
