低位产钳助产术

低位产钳助产术可以帮助难产患者快速结束分娩,是一种较好的阴道助产方法。低位产钳助产术前应仔细检查孕妇和胎儿的情况,严格把控手术指征和禁忌证,尽量减少母儿并发症。     

阴道助产术应注意的问题

正确选用阴道助产方法,有益于降低剖宫产率,并保证母婴健康。在阴道助产指征明确和条件具备情况下,选用胎头吸引助产术或产钳助产术应结合各种情况考虑。低位或出口产钳以及胎吸助产是解决第二产程宫缩乏力、因疾病需缩短第二产程的良好手段,手术时间短,产后恢复好。     

阴道手术产

阴道手术产是指助产者运用产钳或胎头吸引器使胎儿经阴道分娩,由于产科医生经验和能力的缺乏而使经阴道助产手术分娩的数量下降。文章就阴道手术产的指征、手术技巧、并发症以及手术方式的选择等进行讨论。     

10年间阴道助产术的临床应用回顾性分析

目的:分析2007~2016年10年期间四川省妇幼保健院分娩产妇中的阴道手术助产率、剖宫产率以及母婴结局的变化,探索提高阴道助产技术,降低剖宫产率的方法和途径。方法:回顾性分析2007~2016年分娩的51199例产妇病历资料,比较经过全面阴道助产培训后的5年(2012~2016年)与全面培训前的5年(2007~2011年)全院的分娩情况及近期母婴预后,并分析培训后5年分娩产妇的阴道助产率、剖宫产率、新生儿窒息率的变化趋势。结果:(1)培训前的5年,分娩产妇的阴道手术助产率是1.11%,剖宫产率是58.52%,Ⅲ度以上会阴裂伤率是0.56%,新生儿窒息率是5.88%。而培训后的最近5年,分娩产妇的阴道助产率是3.16%,剖宫产率是46.42%,Ⅲ度以上会阴裂伤率是0.23%,新生儿窒息率是3.21%。培训前后两个阶段的指标比较,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。(2)经过培训后近五年我院分娩产妇的阴道助产率逐年上升,而剖宫产率则逐年下降,新生儿窒息率和产妇的会阴损伤率也逐年下降。结论:通过对我院产科医护人员进行阴道助产模拟培训和临床实践培训,可以提高阴道助产技术的临床应用,降低剖宫产率,并改善母婴结局,阴道助产模拟培训模式值得推广运用。     

产钳助产术与胎头吸引助产术的评估

在分娩过程中 ,采用适当的阴道助产方法 ,对于降低剖宫产率 ,保证母婴健康是安全而有效的手段。阴道助产的方法主要有两种 ,一种是产钳助产术 ,另一种是胎头吸引助产术。这两种助产方法所需条件基本相同 ,但又有各自的优缺点 ,怎样选择正确的助产方法 ,达到使产妇经阴道安全分娩 ,减少新生儿损伤的目的 ,是产科医生的必备技能。1　产钳助产术　　产钳是为牵引出胎儿而设计的 ,产钳助产术开始于 17世纪 ,在 2 0世纪初抗生素问世以前 ,剖宫产术的危险性较大 ,产钳助产术解决了部分难产 ,但高、中位的产钳也造成了较多的胎儿及母体的损伤。现在…     

产钳助产术108例临床分析

为正确评价产钳助产术（ｏｂｓｔｅｔｒｉｃａｌｆｏｒｃｅｐｓａｉｄｄｅｌｉｖｅｒｙ，ＯＦＡＤ）在产科中的应用价值，现将我院５年来施行ＯＦＡＤ的资料分析如下。１临床资料１９９０年２月至１９９５年１月在我院共有１５８４例产妇分娩，其中初产妇９０例，经产妇１...     

臀位阴道分娩

臀先露是最常见的胎位异常,阴道分娩风险高。产科医生和助产士应对臀先露的产妇进行充分评估及沟通,选择适宜的病例阴道分娩,同时加强产时监护,以确保臀位阴道分娩的母婴安全。本文围绕臀先露的病因、臀位阴道分娩的适应证、禁忌证、注意事项及可能的风险进行阐述。     

阴道助产对剖宫产术后阴道分娩母婴结局的影响

目的探讨阴道助产对于剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道分娩母婴结局的影响。 方法回顾性分析2014年1月1日至2018年12月31日广东省妇幼保健院收治的剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道分娩的567例产妇的临床资料,将成功阴道分娩者纳入顺产组475例,将阴道分娩过程中接受助产手术者纳入助产组92例(产钳助产59例、胎头吸引助产33例),比较两组母婴结局和并发症情况,以及不同助产方式母婴结局和并发症情况。 结果(1)助产组高龄产妇29例(31.52%),顺产组89例(18.74%),两组相比差异有统计学意义(χ²＝7.64,P<0.001);助产组住院时间(2.80±0.73)d,顺产组(2.04±0.24)d,差异有统计学意义(t＝-18.13,P<0.001)。(2)助产组产后出血量(316.16±483.67)ml,产后出血率5.43%,顺产组产后出血量(201.38±144.43)ml,产后出血率1.26%,差异有统计学意义(t＝-4.29,P<0.001; χ²＝7.05,P＝0.008);两组其他分娩并发症及新生儿并发症发生率均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。(3)两种助产方式之间相比,产钳组出胎时间(10.36±1.75)min,胎吸引产组出胎时间(12.12±2.36)min,差异有统计学意义(t＝-4.09,P<0.001)。产钳组住院时间为(2.95±0.71)d,胎吸引产组为(2.55±0.71)d,差异有统计学意义(t＝2.63,P＝0.010);两种助产方式分娩并发症及新生儿并发症发生率无统计学差异(P>0.05)。 结论阴道助产可能会增加剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道试产产妇产后出血的风险,但未增加新生儿并发症的发生风险,产程中应根据母胎情况选择恰当的助产方式。     

Instrumental vaginal delivery

The application of an instrument to facilitate the birth of a child is a process that dates back centuries. This review examines the current uses of obstetric forceps and ventouse and provides a brief reminder of the methods of application and techniques of delivery required with each instrument.     

Vacuum extraction for non-rotational and rotational assisted vaginal birth

Vacuum-assisted birth is a safe mode of birth in the presence of a skilled provider. Vacuum extraction can avoid prolonged second stage of labour, birth asphyxia in the presence of foetal distress or maternal pushing where contraindicated. Vacuum-assisted births – particularly those in midpelvic rotational births – have been increasingly traded for caesarean births, although the latter are generally associated with potentially a greater risk to women and (future) children. In this article, (contra)indications and the basics of vacuum technique are elaborated. A specific section is dedicated to vacuum extraction for rotational birth. If these techniques are known, trained and practiced by obstetric care givers, then vacuum extraction has tremendous potential to make childbirth safer.     

Mediolateral episiotomy reduces the risk for anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery

Objective  To determine the risk factors for anal sphincter injuries during operative vaginal delivery.
Setting and design  A population-based observational study.
Population  All 21 254 women delivered with vacuum extraction and 7478 women delivered with forceps, derived from the previously validated Dutch National Obstetric Database from the years 1994 to 1995.
Methods  Anal sphincter injury was defined as any injury, partial or complete, of the anal sphincters. Risk factors were determined with multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Main outcome measures  Individual obstetric factors, e.g. fetal birthweights, duration of second stage, etc.
Results  Anal sphincter injury occurred in 3.0% of vacuum extractions and in 4.7% of forceps deliveries. Primiparity, occipitoposterior position and fetal birthweight were associated with an increased risk for anal sphincter injury in both types of operative vaginal delivery, whereas duration of second stage was associated with an increased risk only in vacuum extractions. Mediolateral episiotomy protected significantly for anal sphincter damage in both vacuum extraction (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.09–0.13) and forceps delivery (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.07–0.11). The number of mediolateral episiotomies needed to prevent one sphincter injury in vacuum extractions was 12, whereas 5 mediolateral episiotomies could prevent one sphincter injury in forceps deliveries.
Conclusions  Primiparity and occipitoposterior presentation are strong risk factors for the occurrence of anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery. The highly significant protective effect of mediolateral episiotomies in both types of operative vaginal delivery warrants the conclusions that this type of episiotomy should be used routinely during these interventions to protect the anal sphincters.     

Consent Practices for Assisted Vaginal Births (AVB) at Two Tertiary Care Hospitals: A Retrospective Review of Physician Documentation

ObjectiveTo determine whether assisted vaginal birth (AVB) consent documentation, a surrogate for in vivo consent, aligns with Canadian practice guidelines at 2 Canadian tertiary-level obstetric centres.MethodsThis was a retrospective review of AVBs (vacuum and forceps) from July 2019 to December 2019 at 2 tertiary-level hospitals with template-based (Site 1) or dictation-based (Site 2) documentation. We extracted, from obstetric and neonatal charts, AVB type, physician and documenter types (resident/fellow/family doctor/generalist obstetrics and gynecology [OBGYN]/maternal-fetal medicine), and consent elements (present/absent) based on a predetermined checklist. Data were summarized and comparisons were made using chi-square test, Fisher exact test, and logistic regression, where appropriate.ResultsWe identified 551 AVBs (156 forceps, 395 vacuum) with most documentation completed by generalist OBGYNs or residents (333/551, 60.5%). Most vacuum-assisted deliveries documented no specific maternal (366/395, 92.7%) or neonatal (364/395, 92.2%) risks, and 107/156 (68.6%) and 106/156 (67.9%) forceps-assisted deliveries lacked specific documentation of maternal and neonatal risk, respectively. At Site 2, postpartum hemorrhage risk at vacuum-assisted deliveries was more commonly documented (6/90 [6.7%] vs. 2/395 [0.7%], P = 0.002) as was at least 1 neonatal risk and risk of obstetrical anal sphincter injury at forceps-assisted deliveries (50/133 [37.6%] vs. 0/23 [0%], P < 0.001) and (43/133 [32.3%] vs. 0/23 [0%], P = 0.001), respectively.ConclusionsOpportunity to improve AVB consent documentation exists, warranting quality improvement initiatives.