足月选择性剖宫产分娩新生儿不良结局的影响因素

doi:10.6040/j.issn.1671-7554.0.2015.986

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的分析足月选择性剖宫产分娩的新生儿不良结局发生的影响因素。方法选择2011年11月至2014年10月在山东大学第二医院行选择性剖宫产的产妇及其新生儿的临床资料进行回顾性分析。收集产妇和新生儿的基本资料。新生儿不良结局包括需转入重症监护室(NICU)治疗和患呼吸系统疾病。利用t检验、卡方检验和二元Logistic回归进行统计学分析。结果共3 290例产妇及其新生儿纳入研究,其中250例新生儿需转NICU治疗,110例新生儿患呼吸系统疾病。影响新生儿转NICU的因素为:产妇产次、体质量指数(BMI)、分娩孕周和新生儿性别;影响新生儿呼吸系统疾病发生的因素为:产妇产次、分娩孕周和新生儿性别。有3次及其以上分娩史的产妇分娩的新生儿发生不良结局的风险明显升高。BMI较低的产妇分娩的新生儿需转NICU的风险降低。37^+0~6周分娩的新生儿转NICU的发生风险是39^+0~7周的1.9倍(OR=1.9,95%CI=1.2~3.0);37^+0~6周和38^+0~6周分娩的新生儿呼吸系统疾病的发生风险分别是39^+0~7周的2.5倍(OR=2.5,95%CI=1.4~4.7)和1.8倍(OR=1.8,95%CI=1.1~2.7)。男性新生儿呼吸系统疾病和转NICU的发生风险分别是女性新生儿的2.2倍(OR=2.2,95%CI=1.4~3.4)和1.3倍(OR=1.3,95%CI=1.0~1.7),差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论足月选择性剖宫产的最佳分娩孕周为39~40周;短时间出现产兆后进行的剖宫产未能减少新生儿不良结局的发生;男性新生儿不良结局的发生风险增加;BMI较高和有3次及以上分娩史的产妇分娩的新生儿不良结局发生风险增加。

关键词: 剖宫产, 选择性, 影响因素, 新生儿不良结局, 足月

Abstract: Objective To analyze the influencing factors of adverse outcomes in neonates delivered at term by elective caesarean. Methods Clinical data of mothers and babies delivered by elective caesarean section during Nov.1, 2011 and Oct.31, 2014 at the Second Hospital of Shandong University were retrospectively reviewed. The neonatal adverse outcomes were analyzed with t-test, chi-square test and logistic regression analysis, including transference to NICU and respiratory diseases. Results A total of 3,290 mothers and their neonates were enrolled, of which 250 neonates needed to be transferred to NICU, and 110 neonates developed a respiratory disease. The factors that caused the neonates to be transferred to NICU were parity, BMI, delivery gestational age and fetal sex. The factors that caused the neonates to develop a respiratory disease were parity, delivery gestational age and fetal sex. The risk of adverse outcomes in neonates whose mothers parity was three times and above was significantly higher. The risk of transference to NICU was lower in neonates delivered by mothers with smaller BMI. The risk of transference to NICU for neonates delivered in 山东大学学报 (医学版)54卷5期 -洪海洁,等.足月选择性剖宫产分娩新生儿不良结局的影响因素 \=-37^+0-6 weeks was 1.9 times than those delivered in 39^+0-7 weeks(OR=1.9, 95%CI=1.2-3.0). The risk of respiratory disease for neonates delivered in 37^+0-6 weeks and 38^+0-6 weeks were respectively 2.5 times and 1.8 times than those delivered in 39^+0-7 weeks(OR=2.5, 95%CI=1.4-4.7 and OR=1.8, 95%CI=1.1-2.7). The risk of a respiratory disease and transference to NICU in male neonates were respectively 2.2 times and 1.3 times than in female neonates(OR=2.2, 95%CI=1.4~3.4 and OR=1.3, 95%CI=1.0-1.7). The differences were statistically significant(all P<0.05). Conclusion The best delivery gestational age for elective cesarean section is 39-40 weeks. Cesarean sections conducted shortly after onset of labor do not reduce the risk of neonatal adverse outcomes. The risk of adverse outcomes in male neonates is higher than in female neonates. The risk of neonatal adverse outcomes in mothers with higher BMI, or whose parity is three times and above is increased.

Key words: Term baby, Cesarean section, Elective, Neonatal adverse outcomes, Influencing factors

中图分类号:

R719.8

洪海洁,孙文娟,张媛,徐永萍. 足月选择性剖宫产分娩新生儿不良结局的影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报（医学版）, 2016, 54(5): 56-61.

HONG Haijie, SUN Wenjuan, ZHANG Yuan, XU Yongping. Influencing factors of adverse outcomesin term neonates delivered by elective caesarean[J]. JOURNAL OF SHANDONG UNIVERSITY (HEALTH SCIENCES), 2016, 54(5): 56-61.

参考文献

[1] Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM, Lumbiganon P, et al. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse shorter maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health [J]. BMC Med, 2010, 8: 71. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-71.
[2] Wilmink FA, Hukkelhoven CW, Lunshof S, et al. Neonatal outcome following elective cesarean section beyond 37 weeks of gestation: a 7-year retrospective analysis of a national registry [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 202(3): 250.e1-8.
[3] Terada K, Ito M, Kumasaka S, et al. Timing of elective cesarean singleton delivery and neonatal respiratory outcomes at a Japanese perinatal center[J]. J Nippon Med Sch, 2014, 81(4):285-288.
[4] Doan E, Gibbons K, Tudehope D.The timing of elective caesarean deliveries and early neonatal outcomes in singleton infants born 37-41 weeks gestation[J]. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol, 2014, 54(4):340-347.
[5] Glavind J, Uldbjerg N. Elective cesarean delivery at 38 and 39 weeks: neonatal and maternal risks[J]. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 27(2):121-127.
[6] 郭琦, 李雷, 边旭明. 足月择期剖宫产的时机与新生儿结局的分析[J]. 中华围产医学杂志, 2011, 14(1): 12-18. GUO Qi, LI Lei, BIAN Xuming, et al. Timing of elective cesarean delivery at term and neonatal outcomes[J]. Chin J Perinat Med, 2011, 14(1):12-18.
[7] Morrison JJ, Rennie JM, Milton PJ. Neonatal respiratory morbidity and mode of delivery at term: influence of timing of elective caesarean section[J]. Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 1995, 102(2):101-106.
[8] Zanardo V, Simbi AK, Franzoi M, et al. Neonatal respiratory morbidity risk and mode of delivery at term: influence of timing of elective caesarean delivery[J]. Acta Paediatr, 2004, 93(5):643-647.
[9] Hansen AK, Wisborg K, Uldbjerg N, et al. Risk of respiratory morbidity in term infants delivered by elective cesarean section: cohort study[J]. BMJ, 2008, 336(7635):85-87.
[10] Kolas T, Saugstad OD, Daltveit AK, et al. Planned cesarean versus planned vaginal delivery at term: comparison of newborn infant outcomes[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2006, 195(6):1538-1543.
[11] Senturk MB, Cakmak Y, Gündog^ˇdu M, et al. Does performing cesarean section after onset of labor has positive effect on neonatal respiratory disorders?[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2015, 18: 1-4.[Epub ahead of print].
[12] Glavind J, Kindberg SF, Uldbjerg N, et al. Elective caesarean section at 38 weeks versus 39 weeks: neonatal and maternal outcomes in a randomised controlled trial[J]. BJOG, 2013, 120(9):1123-1132.
[13] Vilchez G, Chelliah A, Argoti P, et al. Maternal race and neonatal outcomes after elective repeat cesarean delivery[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2014, 27(4):368-371.
[14] Chiossi G, Lai Y, Landon MB, et al. Timing of delivery and adverse outcomes in term singleton repeat cesarean deliveries[J]. Obstet Gynecool, 2013, 121(3):561-569.
[15] Hutcheon JA, Strumpf EC, Harper S, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after implementation of a hospital policy to limit low-risk planned caesarean deliveries before 39 weeks of gestation: an interrupted time-series analysis[J]. BJOG, 2015, 122(9):1200-1206.
[16] Ertugrul S, Gün I, Müngen E, et al. Evaluation of neonatal outcomes in elective repeat cesarean delivery at term according to weeks of gestation [J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2013, 39(1):105-112.
[17] Mohammed AB, Bayo AI, Abu-Jubara MF. Timing of elective repeated cesarean delivery in patients with previous two or more cesarean section[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2013, 26(1):10-12.
[18] 刘洪莉, 漆洪波, 罗欣. 择期选择性剖宫产终止妊娠的时机及母儿结局[J]. 中华围产医学杂志, 2014, 17(4):224-229. LIU Hongli, QI Hongbo, LUO Xin, et al. Timing of elective repeat cesarean delivery and maternal and neonatal outcomes[J]. Chin J Perinat Med, 2014, 17(4):224-229.
[19] Melamed N, Hadar E, Keidar L, et al. Timing of planned repeat cesarean delivery after two or more previous cesarean sections-risk for unplanned cesarean delivery and pregnancy outcome[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2014, 27(5):431-438.
[20] Yee W, Amin H, Wood S. Elective cesarean delivery, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and neonatal respiratory distress[J]. Obestet Gynecol, 2008, 111(4):823-828.
[21] Riskin A, Gonen R, Kugelman A, et al. Does cesarean section before the scheduled date increase the risk of neonatal morbidity?[J]. Isr Med Assoc J, 2014, 16(9):559-563.
[22] Carey MA, Card JW, Voltz JW, et al. The impact of sex and sex hormones on lung physiology and disease: lessons from animal studies[J]. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, 2007, 293(2):L272-278.
[23] Crane JM, Murphy P, Burrage L, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes of extreme obesity in pregnancy[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Can, 2013, 35(7):606-611.

相关文章 15

[1]	孙佳丽,王亮,王长凤,张杰,郭磊. Klippel-Trenaunay综合征儿童情绪与行为特征及其影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(3): 78-82.
[2]	宋一鸣,王佳丰,韩晓娟,杜怡峰. 脑维持与认知功能:测量、影响因素和机制[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(1): 1-7.
[3]	徐欣颖,颜伟,石兴龙,岳芳,吕婧,乔颖异,张宇琦,程传龙,左慧,李秀君. 山东省滨州市手足口病的流行特征及影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2026, 64(1): 118-125.
[4]	孙爽爽,仉率杰,张伯韬,袁莹,于媛媛,薛付忠. 基于真实世界研究的18~50岁人群急性缺血性卒中影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(9): 40-46.
[5]	王宁,郝秀梅,牛翔,黄金明,徐静雅. 中国中老年高血糖、血脂异常、高血压人群健康体检服务利用现状及影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(7): 82-91.
[6]	张永媛,王清亮,连雪洪. 山东省某三级综合医院罕见病患者住院费用结构变动情况及影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(5): 111-119.
[7]	陈瑛翼,游倩,王意,张帆,李凤,季舒铭,徐浩源,饶志勇. 办公室职员肌肉质量减少预测模型的开发与验证[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(4): 26-35.
[8]	刘国伟,翟艳,王薇,吕军城. 潍坊市某城区65岁及以上老年人社会适应能力现状及其影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(2): 104-110.
[9]	穆弘杰,卢伟,吕军城. 居民抑郁、焦虑症状和心理健康素养现况及影响因素分析[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2025, 63(12): 105-111.
[10]	刘峰,马彩霞,李春燕,程海英,靳乐雨,刘仲,李学文. 2023年11月流感高峰期济南市大学生流感样病例发生情况及影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2024, 62(7): 91-97.
[11]	景睿,张文茜,董卉,董怡然,于胜男,段勇,闫芹,赵传禄,李秀君,汪卫兵. 济南市大一新生结核病防治知信行现状及行为影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2024, 62(2): 101-107.
[12]	冯绪强,高萍,孙超,陶琳,闫根全,冷冰. 替加环素治疗感染性疾病临床疗效及影响因素[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2024, 62(12): 11-20.
[13]	于菲萍,李鑫,司明舒,张丹,苏永刚. 医学生医养结合认知程度与养老就业意愿[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2024, 62(11): 105-114.
[14]	张立辰,张雨秋,李远,张帆,韩辉,曲仪庆,王晓平,王明哲,陈晓梅. 体外膜氧合联合选择性支气管封堵术救治肺切除术后支气管胸膜瘘1例[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(8): 106-110.
[15]	刘凤祺,高峰,薛彩彩,乔秀梅,王金红. 高糖诱导PC12细胞损伤的影响因素及梓醇的保护作用[J]. 山东大学学报 (医学版), 2023, 61(7): 34-39.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed