medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-3194 (Print)
Órgano de difusión oficial del Instituto Materno Infantil del Estado de México

2009, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Arch Inv Mat Inf 2009; 1 (2)

Revisión rutinaria de cavidad uterina en el postparto inmediato

Alvirde ÁO, Rodríguez AG

Language: Spanish
References: 25
Page: 58-63
PDF size: 77.57 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess puerperal morbidity in patients who underwent revision of uterine cavity and identify routinely review whether the postpartum uterus is a risk factor associated with postpartum uterine infection. Material and methods: This is a case series study, prospective, transversal and comparative study. We included patients who were enrolled in the immediate postpartum period postpartum care delivery and pregnancy of 37 weeks gestation or greater. Patients were randomized into two groups. Women in group I underwent manual review of routinely cavity, following the conventional techniques of asepsis and antisepsis. At no group II patients underwent uterine manual review. Both groups were cited for evaluation of the first and sixth week after the event obstetric postpartum for infection and other complications. Results: A total of 130 patients. Each group had 65. There were no differences between the two groups regarding age, number of pregnancies and gestational age. Complications occurred in three patients (4.61%) in group I and in one (1.53%) in group II. The complications in group I were deciduitis in two patients (3.07%) and episiorrhaphy infection in one (1.53%). In group II was a case of deciduitis (1.53%) as the only complication. Conclusions:The review of immediate postpartum uterine cavity is precise and should not be performed routinely, because there is no difference in the presentation of complications.


REFERENCES

  1. Díaz CLA. La revisión uterina postparto: ¿factor de riesgo para infección puerperal? Rev Coloma Obstet Ginecol 2007.

  2. Carrera MJM. Tratado y Atlas de operatoria obstetricia. 2a ed. Vol. III. México: Salvat; 1988. p. 340-342.

  3. Blanchette H. Elective manual exploration of the uterus alter delivery: a study and review. J Reprod Med 1977; 19 (1): 13-16.

  4. Epperly TD. Efficacy of routine postpartum uterine exploration and manual sponge curettage. J Fam Pract 1989; 28 (2): 172-176.

  5. Norma Oficial Mexicana. NOM 007-SSA2-1993. Atención de la mujer durante el embarazo, parto y puerperio y del recién nacido. Criterios y procedimientos para la prestación del servicio.

  6. World Health Organization. Report of the Technical Working Group on Essential Care of the Newborn 1996.

  7. Schwenzer AW. Fisiología y patología del periodo del alumbramiento. Clin Obst Gin 1966; 4: 430.

  8. Glass M, Rosenthal AH. New York State. J Med 1948; 48: 159.

  9. Peralta R. Obstetricia y clínica obstétrica. Bogotá: Antares editores; 1956.

  10. Peralta R. Revisión uterina sistemática post-partum en clientela particular. Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol 1964; 15: 55-60.

  11. Agreda Y, Abdallah M, Briceño B. Influencia en la revisión manual endouterina sobre la aparición de endometritis puerperal. Revisión de la literatura y experiencia nacional. PCM 1991; 5 (3): 53-58.

  12. Greenhill Obstetrics. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1955.

  13. Prendiville W, Harding J. The Bristol third stage trial: active versus physiological management of third stage of labor. BMJ 1988; 297: 1295-1300.

  14. Rogers J, Wood J, McCandlish R et al. Active versus expectant management of the third stage of labor: the Hinchinbrooke randomized controlled trial. Lancet 1998; 351: 693-699.

  15. Botella LJ, Clavero J. Tratado de ginecología. 3a ed. Editorial Revolucionaria; 1980.

  16. Ángel E, Ruiz A, Cifuentes Y, Parra S. Reducción de infecciones nosocomiales perinatales en hospitales modelos en Colombia. Salud Procreativa y Perinatal 1997; 3: 8-10.

  17. Dombrowski M, Bottoms S. Third stage of labor: Analysis of duration and clinical practice. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172: 1279-1284.

  18. Romero R, Hsu YC, Athanassiadis P et al. Preterm delivery: A risk factor for retained placenta. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163: 823-825.

  19. Magan E, Marin J. Complicated post-partum preeclampsia-eclampsia. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 1955; 22: 337-355.

  20. Berger E, Gillieson M. Puerperal febrile complications and puerperal flora following elective manual exploration of the uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981; 139: 320-323.

  21. Atkinson MW, Owen J, Wren A, Hauth J. The effect of manual removal of the placenta on postcesarean endometritis. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 87: 99-102.

  22. Susan M et al. Clin Obstet Temas actuales. México: Interamericana; 1989. p. 351-357.

  23. Pacheco J et al. Endometritis puerperal. Incidencia y factores de riesgo. Gin Obst 1998; 44 (1).

  24. Comisión de Arbitraje Médico del Estado de Veracruz. Lineamiento técnico para la prevención, diagnóstico y manejo de la infección puerperal. 2007.

  25. Calhoun BC, Brost B. Emergency management of sudden puerperal fever. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 1995.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com