腹壁横切口与纵切口对二次剖宫产术效果比较

目的：探讨分析对瘢痕子宫行再次剖宫产时腹壁横切口与纵切口的利弊。方法：选择2010年6月-2013年6月本院收治的需要二次剖宫产的孕妇110例,所有孕妇及家属均知情并同意,把第一次剖宫产横切口的55例孕妇作为对照组,第一次剖宫产纵切口的55例孕妇作为治疗组。两组均按照原腹壁旧切口手术。观察两组盆腹腔粘连、胎儿娩出的时间、总手术时间、术中出血量及新生儿窒息情况。结果：治疗组胎儿娩出时间、总手术时间比对照组短,两组比较差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;术中出血量及胎儿窒息方面治疗组比对照组少,但两组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;治疗组总粘连率为23.63%（13/55）,对照组为54.50%（30/55）,两组比较差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论：对于有再次剖宫产手术可能的产妇切口应首选腹壁纵切口,以利于再次手术操作,同时减少手术创伤,对二次剖宫产的产妇具有重要的临床意义。

Abdominal Transverse Incision with Longitudinal Incision Cesarean Comparison of the Secondary

Objective： To investigate the analysis again cesarean uterine scar line abdominal transverse incision with vertical incision in the pros. Method： The first transverse incision cesarean section 55 cases of pregnant women as a control group, the first vertical incision cesarean section 55 cases of pregnant women as a treatment group. Both groups were used according to the original abdominal incision. Result： The treatment group fetus time; total operative time were shorter than the control group, two groups difference was statistically significant （ P〈0.05 ） . Intraoperative blood loss and fetal distress in the treatment group were less than the control group, but between the two groups had no statistical significance （ P〉0.05 ） Adhesion treatment group was 23.63% in the control group was 54.50% in group, the difference was statistically significant （ P〈0.05 ） . Conclusion ： For a repeat cesarean section surgery may be preferred maternal abdorrdnal incision should be vertical incision to facilitate the re-operation operations, while reducing surgical trauma, the secondary cesarean section has important clinical significance.