切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (01) : 87 -93. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2022.01.012

论著

先天性生殖器官异常孕妇的围生结局分析
王思, 胡青, 廖华, 王晓东, 余海燕()   
  • 收稿日期:2021-07-07 修回日期:2022-01-08 出版日期:2022-02-01
  • 通信作者: 余海燕

Analysis of perinatal outcomes of pregnant women with congenital anomaly of genital organ

Si Wang, Qing Hu, Hua Liao, Xiaodong Wang, Haiyan Yu()   

  • Received:2021-07-07 Revised:2022-01-08 Published:2022-02-01
  • Corresponding author: Haiyan Yu
  • Supported by:
    Sichuan Academic and Technical Leaders Training Support Fund(Office of Human Resources and Social Security of Sichuan 〔2017〕919-25)
引用本文:

王思, 胡青, 廖华, 王晓东, 余海燕. 先天性生殖器官异常孕妇的围生结局分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(01): 87-93.

Si Wang, Qing Hu, Hua Liao, Xiaodong Wang, Haiyan Yu. Analysis of perinatal outcomes of pregnant women with congenital anomaly of genital organ[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2022, 18(01): 87-93.

目的

探讨先天性生殖器官异常孕妇的围生结局。

方法

选择2009年1月至2019年12月,于四川大学华西第二医院活产分娩的99 779例单胎妊娠孕妇为研究对象。根据是否合并先天性生殖器官异常,将其分为观察组(n=324,合并)及对照组(n=99 455,未合并)。回顾性分析2组孕妇的临床病例资料,总结观察组不同类型先天性生殖器官异常孕妇的围生结局特点。采用χ2检验及独立样本t检验,对2组孕妇妊娠期各并发症发生率、剖宫产率及新生儿出生体重等,进行统计学分析。本研究遵循的程序符合2013年修订的《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言》要求。

结果

①观察组孕妇最常见先天性生殖器官异常前3位依次为纵隔子宫、单角/残角子宫及弓形子宫,分别占35.2%(114/324)、26.2%(85/324)及13.9%(45/324)。包括既往妊娠次数在内,观察组孕妇共计妊娠571次,其中弓形子宫、纵隔子宫孕妇的自然流产率位列前2位,分别为38.5%(35/91)、28.6%(61/213);阴道畸形孕妇足月产率(70.0%),高于子宫畸形者(52.8%),并且差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.432、P=0.035)。②观察组孕妇早产、胎膜早破、胎位异常、胎盘早剥、胎儿生长受限(FGR)、胎盘黏连/植入、子宫破裂及剖宫产率分别为29.6%、29.3%、36.1%、5.9%、2.5%、21.0%、3.4%、78.7%,均分别高于对照组孕妇的9.8%、22.3%、5.7%、1.2%、1.0%、11.5%、1.5%、62.0%;而羊水过少率(0.9%)及新生儿出生体重[(2 913±652) g],则显著低于对照组的2.9%、(3 254±445) g,并且上述差异均有统计学意义(均为P<0.05)。2组孕妇前置胎盘、妊娠期高血压疾病(HDCP)、产后出血(PPH)及子宫切除率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

先天性生殖器官异常孕妇的母、胎围生期并发症发生风险高。提高该病孕妇的孕前及早孕期诊断率,加强围生期保健及处理,可改善其围生结局。

Objective

To investigate perinatal outcomes of pregnant women with congenital anomalies of genital organ.

Methods

From January 2009 to December 2019, a total of 99 779 cases of single pregnancy women who delivered live births in West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, were selected as research subjects. According to whether combined with congenital anomalies of genital organ or not, they were divided into observation group (n=324, combined) and control group (n=99 455, uncombined). Clinical data of two groups were retrospectively analyzed, and perinatal outcome of pregnant women in observation group were summarized. The incidence of complications during pregnancy, cesarean section rate and neonatal birth weight were statistically compared between two groups by chi-square test and independent-samples t test. The procedures followed in this study were in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki revised in 2013.

Results

① In observation group, top three most common congenital anomalies of genital organ of pregnant women were septate uterus, unicornuate/rudimentary horn uterus and arcuate uterus, accounting for 35.2%(114/324), 26.2%(85/324) and 13.9%(45/324), respectively. The pregnant women in observation group had a total of 571 pregnancies including previous pregnancies, the rates of spontaneous abortion of pregnant women with arcuate uterus and septate uterus were the top two, which were 38.5% (35/91) and 28.6% (61/213), respectively. The full term birth rate of pregnant women with vaginal anomalies (70.0%) was higher than that of pregnant women with uterine anomalies (52.8%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=4.432, P=0.035). ② The preterm birth rate, incidence of premature rupture of membranes, malpresentation, placental abruption, fetal growth restriction (FGR), placenta adhesions/accreta and uterine rupture, and cesarean section rate of pregnant women in observation group were 29.6%, 29.3%, 36.1%, 5.9%, 2.5%, 21.0%, 3.4%, 78.7%, respectively, which were statistically higher than those of 9.8%, 22.3%, 5.7%, 1.2%, 1.0%, 11.5%, 1.5%, 62.0% in control group, while the rate of oligohydramnios and neonatal birth weight were 0.9% and (2 913±652) g, which were significantly lower than those of 2.9% and (3 254±445) g in control group, and all the differences above were statistically significant (all P<0.05). There were no significant differences in rate of placenta previa, hypertensive disorder complicating pregnancy (HDCP) and postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), and hysterectomy rate between two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Pregnant women with congenital anomalies of genital organ are at high risk of maternal and fetal perinatal complications. The pre-pregnancy and early pregnancy diagnosis rate of congenital anomalies of genital organ should be improved in pregnant women, and strengthening perinatal care and perinatal management can improve perinatal outcomes.

表1 不同类型先天性生殖器官异常孕妇围生结局及分娩方式比较[例数(%)]
表2 2组孕妇围生结局及剖宫产率比较[例数(%)]
表3 观察组孕妇妊娠情况比较[次数(%)]
[1]
Christiansen ME, Detti L. Clinically relevant female genital tract anomalies[J]. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2017, 60(1): 18-26. DOI: 10.1097/GRF.0000000000000258.
[2]
Passos IMPE, Britto RL. Diagnosis and treatment of müllerian malformations[J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 59(2): 183-188. DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2020.01.003.
[3]
Turocy JM, Rackow BW. Uterine factor in recurrent pregnancy loss[J]. Semin Perinatol, 2019, 43(2): 74-79. DOI: 10.1053/j.semperi.2018.12.003.
[4]
Cahen-Peretz A, Sheiner E, Friger M, et al. The association between Müllerian anomalies and perinatal outcome[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2019, 32(1): 51-57. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1370703.
[5]
Fox NS, Roman AS, Stern EM, et al. Type of congenital uterine anomaly and adverse pregnancy outcomes[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2014, 27(9): 949-953. DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2013.847082.
[6]
Letterie GS. Management of congenital uterine abnormalities[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2011, 23(1): 40-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.02.008.
[7]
Prior M, Richardson A, Asif S, et al. Outcome of assisted reproduction in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a prospective observational study[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2018, 51(1): 110-117. DOI: 10.1002/uog.18935.
[8]
Grimbizis GF, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saravelos SH, et al. The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies[J]. Hum Reprod, 2016, 31(1): 2-7. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dev264.
[9]
中华医学会妇产科学分会. 女性生殖器官畸形诊治的中国专家共识[J]. 中华妇产科杂志2015, 50(10): 729-733. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2015.10.002.
[10]
Knez J, Saridogan E, Van Den Bosch T, et al. ESHRE/ESGE female genital tract anomalies classification system-the potential impact of discarding arcuate uterus on clinical practice[J]. Hum Reprod, 2018, 33(4): 600-606. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dey043.
[11]
Makrigiannakis A. Implantation in women with uterine congenital malformations[M]// Grimbizis GF, Campo R, Tarlatzis BC, et al. Female genital tract congenital malformations: classification, diagnosis and management. London: Springer, 2015: 29-34. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4471-5146-3.
[12]
Cahen-Peretz A, Walfisch A, Friger M, et a1. Maternal müllerian anomalies and future health of the offspring[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2017, 212: 20-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.02.010.
[13]
曹泽毅. 中华妇产科学[M]. 2版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2004: 706-708.
[14]
Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Zamora J, et al. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2011, 17(6): 761-771. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmr028.
[15]
Olpin JD, Moeni A, Willmore RJ, et a1. MR imaging of Müllerian fusion anomalies[J]. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, 2017, 25(3): 563-575. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2017.03.008.
[16]
Grimbizis GF, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saravelos SH, et al. The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies[J]. Gynecol Surg, 2016, 13: 1-16. DOI: 10.1007/s10397-015-0909-1.
[17]
王姝, 邓姗, 朱兰, 等. 应用3D打印技术手术前诊断女性生殖道畸形附一例报告[J]. 中华妇产科杂志2017, 52(10): 708-710. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2017.10.013.
[18]
Pan HX, Liu P, Duan H, et al. Using 3D MRI can potentially enhance the ability of trained surgeons to more precisely diagnose Mullerian duct anomalies compared to MR alone[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2018, 228: 313-318. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.07.007.
[19]
El Hachem H, Crepaux V, May-Panloup P, et al. Recurrent pregnancy loss: current perspectives[J]. Int J Womens Health, 2017, 9: 331-345. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S100817.
[20]
Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. The pattern of pregnancy loss in women with congenital uterine anomalies and recurrent miscarriage[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2010, 20(3): 416-422. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.11.021.
[21]
Zhou H, Liu Y, Liu L, et al. Maternal pre-pregnancy risk factors for miscarriage from a prevention perspective: a cohort study in China[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2016, 206: 57-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.07.514.
[22]
Jones RK, Jerman J. Population group abortion rates and lifetime incidence of abortion: United States, 2008-2014[J]. Am J Public Health, 2017, 107(12): 1904-1909. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2017.304042.
[23]
Hiersch L, Yeoshoua E, Miremberg H, et al. The association between Mullerian anomalies and short-term pregnancy outcome[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2016, 29(16): 2573-2578. DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1098613.
[24]
Takami M, Aoki S, Kurasawa K, et al. A classification of congenital uterine anomalies predicting pregnancy outcomes[J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2014, 93(7): 691-697. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12400.
[25]
Venetis CA, Papadopoulos SP, Campo R, et al. Clinical implications of congenital uterine anomalies: a Meta-analysis of comparative studies[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2014, 29(6): 665-683. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.09.006.
[26]
Karami M, Jenabi E. The association between Mullerian anomalies and IUGR: a Meta-analysis[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2019, 32(14): 2408-2411. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2018.1432588.
[27]
Khazaei S, Jenabi E, Veisani Y. The association of Mullerian anomalies and placenta abruption: a Meta-analysis[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2019, 32(3): 512-516. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1379072.
[28]
Kroener L, Wang ET, Pisarska MD. Predisposing factors to abnormal first trimester placentation and the impact on fetal outcomes[J]. Semin Reprod Med, 2016, 34(1): 27-35. DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1570029.
[29]
Shim S, Hur YM, Kim DH, et al. Evidence for no significant impact of Müllerian anomalies on reproductive outcomes of twin pregnancy in Korean women[J]. Twin Res Hum Genet, 2016, 19(2): 146-153. DOI: 10.1017/thg.2016.4.
[30]
DI Spiezio Sardo A, Spinelli M, DA Cunha Vieira M, et a1. Hysteroscopic treatment of Müllerian duct anomalies[J]. Minerva Ginecol, 2016, 68(2): 175-185.
[31]
Budden A, Abbott JA. The diagnosis and surgical approach of uterine septa[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2018, 25(2): 209-217. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.07.017.
[1] 李钱梅, 何冠南, 赵婧, 陈曦, 唐玉英, 马丽琼, 梁蓉, 袁桃, 李明星. 早孕期低危妊娠和高危妊娠胎盘微血流成像特征及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 726-732.
[2] 刘涵, 刘晓菲, 陈翰翰, 陈延君, 张雁. 妊娠期肉芽肿性乳腺炎一例[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 253-254.
[3] 钱警语, 郑明明. 《2024意大利妇产科学会非侵入性和侵入性产前诊断指南》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 486-492.
[4] 张舒沁, 陈练. 产后宫腔内妊娠物残留的诊断和临床处理[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 493-497.
[5] 刘子洋, 崔俭俭, 赵茵. 产科弥散性血管内凝血及其评分系统的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 511-518.
[6] 黄蓉, 梁自毓, 祁文瑾. NLRP3炎症小体在胎膜早破孕妇血清中的表达及其意义[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 540-548.
[7] 何霞, 黄蓉, 祁文瑾. 胎膜早破孕妇胎盘与胎膜菌群丰度的高通量测序研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 549-555.
[8] 谢江燕, 王亚菲, 贺芳. 妊娠合并血栓性血小板减少性紫癜2例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 556-563.
[9] 张静, 刘畅, 华成舸. 妊娠期患者口腔诊疗进展[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 340-344.
[10] 徐敬云, 丁波, 蒋宇慧, 沈杨. 妊娠期单孔腹腔镜手术实施行与思[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 262-266.
[11] 鲁珊, 姚蕴珊, 廖色坭, 陈子恩, 张一剑, 蓝健皓, 魏薇, 刘艳杨, 陈艳红, 陈敦金. 妊娠合并急性阑尾炎100例临床研究[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 214-219.
[12] 汪文雁, 郑剑兰, 朱丽慈. 体外受精-胚胎移植术后妊娠患者孕产期风险的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 220-226.
[13] 傅新露, 李之岳, 卢丹. 妊娠合并结肠癌穿孔致脓毒症休克一例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 227-231.
[14] 朱丽慈, 郑剑兰, 刘士璇, 张文蕾, 胡群, 陈丽旋. 妊娠期子宫嵌顿一例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 232-236.
[15] 杭中霞, 王朝霞, 孙琴, 李妮. 血清Irisin、TSH 及Hcy 在妊娠期甲状腺功能减退症诊断中的应用[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 265-269.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?