medigraphic.com

2008, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Cir Cir 2008; 76 (6)

Morbilidad materna asociada a operación cesárea

Anaya-Prado R, Madrigal-Flores S, Reveles-Vázquez JA, Ramírez-Barba ÉJ, Frías-Terrones G, Godínez-Rubí JM

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 467-472
PDF size: 56.67 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: At present, cesarean section (CS) is performed frequently, and delivery with CS is associated with complications in up to 15% of the cases. Maternal mortality is six times higher after CS than vaginal delivery. In this study we estimated maternal morbidity associated with CS.
Methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, maternal morbidity associated with CS was evaluated in all patients operated on between January and December 2006. Variables analyzed included demographic and obstetrical data, type of surgery (elective or urgent), surgical approach, hospital stay, and presence and type of complications. Prevalence of complications as well as associated morbidity and mortality were all identified.
Results: During the study period, a total of 2827 CS were performed. Average age was 28.7 ± 6.2 years. CS was performed both as an emergency procedure and electively in 2285 (80.82%) and 542 (19.17%) cases, respectively. There were 685 (24.23%) complications in 593 patients (20.97%); 460 (16.2%) and 133 (4.7%) were performed urgently and electively, respectively. The most frequent complications were hemorrhage (540, 19.1%), infections (38, 1.34%), cervical and/or cervicouterine lesions (32, 1.13%); vascular lesions (11, 0.39%), and thromboembolic phenomenon (6, 0.21%). There were 12 maternal deaths (0.42%). Mean hospital stay was 4.43 ± 3.03, 4.5 ± 3.14, and 4.09 ± 2.5 days for the general population, urgent surgery and elective surgery, respectively.
Conclusions: Our observations demonstrate that maternal morbidity associated with CS is higher than that reported in the literature. Blood loss ›500 ml was the most frequent complication and the only cause of maternal death after CS.


REFERENCES

  1. Eastman NJ. The role of Frontier America in the development of cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1932;24:919-922.

  2. Karchmer KS, Fernández-del Castillo C. Obstetricia y Medicina Perinatal. Temas Selectos. México: Colegio Mexicano de Especialistas en Ginecología y Obstetricia; 2006.

  3. Chalmers I, Emkin M, Keirse MJNC. Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth. Vol II. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.

  4. Epi Info (computer program). Version 6. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Births; 2004.

  5. Balizan JM, Althabe F, Barros FC, Alexander S. Rates and implications of cesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999;319:1397-1400.

  6. Sachs BP, Kobelin C, Castro MA, Frigoletto I. The risk of lowering the cesarean delivery rate. N Engl J Med 1999;340:54-57.

  7. Cajiga MF, Mendoza DL, Murguía GH, Jiménez JF, Rodríguez ZE. Justificaciones actuales de la operación cesárea. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1994;62:31-32.

  8. Phillips RN, Thornton J, Gleicher N. Physician bias in cesarean section. JAMA 2002;248:1082-1084.

  9. Socol ML, García RM, Peaceman AM, Dooley ML. Reducing cesarean births at a primarily private university hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1748-1754.

  10. Sereno-Coló JA. Razones en pro y en contra de la operación cesárea. Ginecol Obstet Mex 1999;67:353-355.

  11. Resnik R. Can a 29% cesarean delivery rate possibly be justified? Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:752-754.

  12. Bergholt T, Stenderup JK, Vedested-Jakobsen A, Helm P, Lenstrup C. Intraoperative surgical complication during cesarean section: an observational study of incidence and risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003;82:251-256.

  13. Nielsen TF, Hokergard KH. Cesarean section and intraoperative surgical complications. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1984;63:103-108.

  14. Zelop C, Heffner LJ. The downside of cesarean delivery: short- and longterm complications. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2004;47:386-393.

  15. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, Leveno KJ, Spong CY. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:1226-1232.

  16. Shipp TD. Trial of labor after cesarean: so, what are the risks? Clin Obstet Gynecol 2004;47:365-377.

  17. Lemus-Rocha R, García-Gutiérrez LB, Basavilvazo-Rodríguez MA, Cruz-Avelar A, Peralta-Pedro ML, Hernández-Valencia M. Incidencia de herida quirúrgica infectada y profilaxis con cefotaxima en cesárea. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2005;73:537-543.

  18. Petitti DB. Maternal mortality and morbility in cesarean. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1985;28:763-769.

  19. Secretaría de Salud. Salud México. Mortalidad materna 2000-2006. Disponible en http://www.ssa.gob.mx

  20. Cabero-Roura L. Tratado de Ginecología, Obstetricia y Medicina de la Reproducción. España: Editorial Médica Panamericana; 2003.

  21. Rubin GL, Peterson HB, Rochat RW, McCarthy BJ, Terry JS. Maternal death after cesarean section in Georgia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;139:681-685.

  22. Schuitemaker N, van Roosmalen J, Dekker G, van Dongen P, van Geinjin H, Graberhorst JB. Maternal mortality after cesarean section in Netherlands. Acta Obstect Gynecol Scand 1997;76:332-334.

  23. Deneux-Tharaux C, Carmona E, Bouvier-Colle MH, Breart G. Postpartum maternal mortality and cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:541-548.

  24. Getahun D, Oyelese Y, Salihu HM, Ananth CV. Previous cesarean delivery and risks of placenta previa and placental abruption. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:771-778.

  25. Lee-Parritz A. Surgical techniques for cesarean delivery: what are the best practices? Clin Obstet Gynecol 2004;47:286-298.

  26. Macario A, El-Sayed YY, Druzin ML. Cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor alter previous cesarean delivery depends on the a priori chance of success. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2004;47:378-385.

  27. Arenas-Márquez H, Anaya-Prado R. Errores en cirugía. Estrategias para mejorar la seguridad quirúrgica. Cir Cir 2008;76:355-361.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com