[1]李高振,高玉霞*,杨月华.影响剖宫产瘢痕妊娠术中大出血发生的高危因素分析及风险预测模型构建[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2018,(10):30-34.
　LI Gao-zhen,GAO Yu-xia*,YANG Yue-hua.Analysis of high risk factors affecting the occurrence of massive hemorrhage during cesarean scar pregnancy and the construction of risk prediction model[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2018,(10):30-34.
点击复制

影响剖宫产瘢痕妊娠术中大出血发生的高危因素分析及风险预测模型构建
分享到：

《中国计划生育和妇产科》[ISSN:1674-4020/CN:51-1708/R]

卷:
期数:
2018年10期
页码:
30-34
栏目:
论著与临床
出版日期:
2018-10-25

文章信息/Info

Title:
Analysis of high risk factors affecting the occurrence of massive hemorrhage during cesarean scar pregnancy and the construction of risk prediction model
作者:
李高振; 高玉霞*; 杨月华
青岛市中心医院产科
Author(s):
LI Gao-zhen; GAO Yu-xia*; YANG Yue-hua
Department of Obstetrics,Qingdao Center Hospital,Qingdao Shandong 266042，P.R.China
关键词:
剖宫产瘢痕妊娠; 出血; 危险因素
Keywords:
cesarean scar pregnancy;  bleeding;  risk factors
分类号:
R 7198
摘要:
目的探讨影响剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠 (cesarean scar pregnancy，CSP)术中大出血发生的高危因素，并构建风险预测模型。方法回顾性分析青岛市中心医院2008年10月至2017年1月收治的277例CSP患者的临床资料，根据治疗方案的不同，将患者分为建模组（170例）和校模组（107例），分别构建风险模型，并利用受试者工作特征曲线 (receiver operating characteristic curve,ROC)检验两者的预测效能。根据最终的治疗结局，将建模组中行“子宫动脉栓塞术（uterine arterial embolization,UAE）+甲氨蝶呤”的73例患者定义为高危组，行“UAE+清宫术”的97例患者为低危组。将校模组中行“腹腔镜下双侧子宫动脉结扎术+病灶清除术”的30例患者定义为高危组，行“腹腔镜监视下清宫术”的77例患者为低危组。结果①　建模组中低危组与高危组患者在年龄、距前次手术时间、停经时间、治疗前β-人绒毛膜促性腺激素（beta human chorionic gonadotropin，β-hCG）、病灶最大径线、病灶前壁肌层厚度、早孕期阴道流血、超声分型、胎血管搏动等方面比较，差异有统计学意义（P＜005）。进一步行Logistic回归分析，发现年龄、停经时间、超声分型、病灶最大径线是独立性危险因素。②　校模组中低危组与高危组患者在年龄、停经时间、病灶最大径线、超声分型、胎血管搏动等方面，差异有统计学意义（P＜005）。进一步行Logistic回归分析，发现年龄、停经时间、超声分型、病灶最大径线是独立性危险因素。③　建模组的ROC曲线下面积为0793，95 % CI为0765～0942，截断值P=0441。校模组的ROC曲线下面积为0793，95 % CI为0632～0921，截断值P=0496。两种模型的AUC差异无统计学意义（P＞005）。结论发病年龄小、停经时间长、包块型CSP、病灶径线大是CSP患者发生大出血的主要危险因素，临床医师对存在上述危险因素的患者应提高警惕。应用预测模型，当患者风险概率＞441 %时，治疗方案应首先考虑UAE联合化疗或腹腔镜下双侧子宫动脉结扎术，病灶清除术。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo explore the risk factors affecting the occurrence of massive hemorrhage in cesarean scar pregnancy(CSP) patients and to construct a risk prediction model. MethodsRetrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 277 patients with CSP admitted to Qingdao Center Hospital from October 2008 to January 2017. According to the different treatment options, patients were divided into modeling group(170 cases) and school module group(107 cases). Risk models were constructed separately and the predictive efficacy of the two was tested using the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC).Results① In the low-risk group and high-risk group in the modeling group, the age, the time of the previous operation, the menstrual time, the treatment of human choroidal gonadotropin (β-hCG), the maximum diameter of the lesion,thickness of anterior wall of lesion, vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy, ultrasound classification, fetal pulsation, etc; the differences were statistically significant(P<005). Further logistic regression analysis showed that age, menstrual time, ultrasound classification, and lesion maximum diameter were independent risk factors. ② There were significant differences in age, menstrual time, maximum lesion diameter, ultrasound classification, and fetal pulsation between the low-risk group and the high-risk group in school module group (P<005). Further logistic regression analysis showed that age, menstrual time, ultrasound classification, and lesion maximum diameter were independent risk factors. ③ The area under the ROC curve of the modeling group was 0793, 95 % CI was 0765~0942, and the cut-off value was P=0441. The area under the ROC curve of the school module was 0793, 95 % CI was 0632~0921, and the cutoff value was P=0496. There was no significant difference in AUC between the two models(P>005).ConclusionThe age of onset is small, the menopause time is long, CSP, and the diameter of the lesion is the main risk factor for the occurrence of major bleeding in patients with cesarean scar pregnancy. Patients with these risk factors should be vigilant. Using the predictive model, when the patient's risk probability is >441%, the treatment plan should first consider uterine arterial embolization combined with chemotherapy or laparoscopic bilateral uterine artery ligation.

参考文献/References:

［1］安海霞，吴素慧，尚海霞．剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠的诊治进展　［J］．中国计划生育和妇产科，2016，8（8）：29-33． ［2］顾祝新，黄健，赵辉．子宫瘢痕妊娠的诊治进展　［J］．介入放射学杂志，2015，24（8）：742-745． ［3］吴晓婷，步仰高．剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕部位妊娠的研究现状和进展　［J］．安徽医学，2015，36（8）：1040-1043． ［4］蓝爱琴．剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕部位妊娠诊治进展　［J］．妇产与遗传（电子版），2016，6（1）：60-64． ［5］张帆，许哲．介入治疗子宫瘢痕妊娠及异位妊娠大出血临床观察　［J］．中国实用医药，2017，12（25）：931-932． ［6］中华医学会计划生育学分会．剖宫产瘢痕妊娠诊断与治疗共识　［J］．中华医学杂志，2012，92（25）：1731-1733． ［7］中华医学会妇产科学分会计划生育学组．剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠诊治专家共识(2016)　［J］．全科医学临床与教育，2017，15（1）：5-9． ［8］梁致怡，杨华．剖宫产子宫瘢痕妊娠介入治疗后最佳清宫时间的临床观察　［J］．中国计划生育学杂志，2015，23（9）：611-614． ［9］陈美琼．瘢痕子宫产生的常见原因及其对远期妊娠的影响　［J］．临床研究，2016，24（11）：217-218． ［10］刘博．包块型剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠(CSP)的临床特点、鉴别诊断及治疗方式　［J］．中国医药指南，2016，14（32）：169-170． ［11］马志红，赵曼曼，王丹阳．经阴道病灶切除术治疗剖宫产子宫瘢痕妊娠临床病例分析 ［J］．现代妇产科进展，2015（10）：772-774． ［12］吴一彤．子宫动脉栓塞 MTX 介入及清宫术联合用于疤痕妊娠的疗效及可行性　［J］．临床和实验医学杂志，2015，14（19）：1638-1640, 1641．

相似文献/References:

[1]解秀珍.妊娠相关性血小板减少症39例临床分析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2010,(05):0.
　XIE Xiu-zhen.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2010,(10):0.
[2]于晓兰.剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的病理特点[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2013,(04):0.
　YU Xiao-lan.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2013,(10):0.
[3]董海伟,杨晓惠,顾向应,等.超声诊断技术在剖宫产瘢痕妊娠中的应用[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2013,(04):0.
　DONG Hai-wei,YANG Xiao-hui,GU Xiang-ying *.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2013,(10):0.
[4]王运昌,陈梅,张周龙,等.超声在剖宫产瘢痕妊娠诊断及治疗中的应用价值[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2014,(04):0.
　WANG Yun-chang,CHEN Mei,ZHANG Zhou-long,et al.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2014,(10):0.
[5]张天宏,史小雨,冯力民,等.宫腹腔镜在剖宫产瘢痕妊娠诊治中的应用[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2015,(10):0.
[6]刘彩霞,郭宝枝,刘爱珍,等.腹腔镜治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠术中中转开腹手术原因分析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2015,(11):0.
　LIU Cai-xia,GUO Bao-zhi,LIU Ai-zhen,et al.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2015,(10):0.
[7]闻人昉,熊小娟,丁兴琳,等.剖宫产瘢痕妊娠介入治疗医疗费用特征分析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2016,(02):0.
　WEN Ren-fang,XIONG Xiao-juan,DIN Xing-lin,et al.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2016,(10):0.
[8]石一复,郝敏,李娟清,等.7所医学院校附属医院2010～2014年正常和异常妊娠浅析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2016,(06):0.
　SHI Yi-fu,HAO Min,LI Juan-qing,et al.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2016,(10):0.
[9]王新波,谢玉翠,王来栋,等.3种方案用于剖宫产瘢痕妊娠药物治疗大出血的对比观察[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2016,(11):0.
　WANG Xin-Bo,XIE Yu-Cui,WANG Lai-Dong,et al.[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2016,(10):0.
[10]石一复*,郝敏,李娟清,等.7所医学院校附属医院2010~2014年正常和 异常妊娠浅析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2016,(6):6.
　SHI Yi-fu*,HAO Min,LI Juan-qing,et al.Analysis of normal and abnormal pregnancies in 7 affiliated hospitals of medical colleges between 2010 and 2014[J].Chinese Journal of Family Planning & Gynecotokology,2016,(10):6.

更新日期/Last Update: 2018-10-25