宫内节育器致子宫穿孔:16年回顾。

Q Medicine Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care Pub Date : 2017-10-01 Epub Date: 2017-07-24 DOI:10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684
Paul A O'Brien, Sarah Pillai
{"title":"宫内节育器致子宫穿孔:16年回顾。","authors":"Paul A O'Brien, Sarah Pillai","doi":"10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction One of the major concerns with the insertion of intrauterine devices is uterine perforation. Though uncommon, it can be debilitating and result in failure of the device. In this article we review uterine perforation with intrauterine contraception (IUC) in a community clinic in the UK over a 16-year period. Methods We prospectively collected data on uterine perforations for the years 2000–2015, reviewed associated factors and calculated the annual rate of perforation, estimating if this lay within the expected range of normal variation using statistical process control (SPC) analysis. We analysed the rates of perforation in relation to the time from delivery and to breastfeeding. Results We identified 30 uterine perforations in 22 795 IUC insertions over the 16 years of observation, with an annual rate ranging from 0 to 4.3 per 1000 insertions, and a mean annual rate of 1.3 per 1000 insertions (95% CI 0.9 to 1.9), which remain within the SPC limits. Twenty-eight of the perforations were in parous women, 87% of whom were within 18 weeks of delivery, peaking at 13 weeks postpartum. Twenty of these were in breastfeeding women. In 3/28 cases for which we have outcome data the device was adherent to or had perforated either the bladder or bowel. Conclusion Our perforation rate is consistent with other studies. Most of our perforations were within 18 weeks of childbirth, earlier than in a recent major study. We cannot tell from our data if there is a true peak in perforations 3 months postpartum as that may be a time when a high proportion of insertions are done.","PeriodicalId":15734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"289-295"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uterine perforation by intrauterine devices: a 16-year review.\",\"authors\":\"Paul A O'Brien, Sarah Pillai\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction One of the major concerns with the insertion of intrauterine devices is uterine perforation. Though uncommon, it can be debilitating and result in failure of the device. In this article we review uterine perforation with intrauterine contraception (IUC) in a community clinic in the UK over a 16-year period. Methods We prospectively collected data on uterine perforations for the years 2000–2015, reviewed associated factors and calculated the annual rate of perforation, estimating if this lay within the expected range of normal variation using statistical process control (SPC) analysis. We analysed the rates of perforation in relation to the time from delivery and to breastfeeding. Results We identified 30 uterine perforations in 22 795 IUC insertions over the 16 years of observation, with an annual rate ranging from 0 to 4.3 per 1000 insertions, and a mean annual rate of 1.3 per 1000 insertions (95% CI 0.9 to 1.9), which remain within the SPC limits. Twenty-eight of the perforations were in parous women, 87% of whom were within 18 weeks of delivery, peaking at 13 weeks postpartum. Twenty of these were in breastfeeding women. In 3/28 cases for which we have outcome data the device was adherent to or had perforated either the bladder or bowel. Conclusion Our perforation rate is consistent with other studies. Most of our perforations were within 18 weeks of childbirth, earlier than in a recent major study. We cannot tell from our data if there is a true peak in perforations 3 months postpartum as that may be a time when a high proportion of insertions are done.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"289-295\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/7/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2016-101684","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

导言:子宫穿孔是宫内节育器置入的主要问题之一。虽然不常见,但它会使人衰弱并导致设备故障。在这篇文章中,我们回顾了子宫穿孔与宫内避孕(IUC)在一个社区诊所在英国超过16年的时间。方法:前瞻性收集2000-2015年子宫穿孔资料,回顾相关因素,计算年穿孔率,采用统计过程控制(SPC)分析,判断其是否在正常变异的预期范围内。我们分析了穿孔率与分娩和母乳喂养时间的关系。结果:在16年的观察中,我们在22 795例IUC插入中发现了30例子宫穿孔,年发生率为0 - 4.3 / 1000次,平均年发生率为1.3 / 1000次(95% CI 0.9 - 1.9),仍在SPC范围内。28例穿孔发生在产妇中,87%发生在分娩18周内,高峰发生在产后13周。其中20例是母乳喂养的妇女。在我们有结果数据的3/28病例中,该装置粘附在膀胱或肠上或穿孔。结论:我们的穿孔率与其他研究结果一致。大多数穿孔发生在分娩后的18周内,比最近的一项主要研究要早。我们不能从我们的数据中判断产后3个月是否有真正的穿孔高峰,因为这可能是插入比例很高的时候。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Uterine perforation by intrauterine devices: a 16-year review.
Introduction One of the major concerns with the insertion of intrauterine devices is uterine perforation. Though uncommon, it can be debilitating and result in failure of the device. In this article we review uterine perforation with intrauterine contraception (IUC) in a community clinic in the UK over a 16-year period. Methods We prospectively collected data on uterine perforations for the years 2000–2015, reviewed associated factors and calculated the annual rate of perforation, estimating if this lay within the expected range of normal variation using statistical process control (SPC) analysis. We analysed the rates of perforation in relation to the time from delivery and to breastfeeding. Results We identified 30 uterine perforations in 22 795 IUC insertions over the 16 years of observation, with an annual rate ranging from 0 to 4.3 per 1000 insertions, and a mean annual rate of 1.3 per 1000 insertions (95% CI 0.9 to 1.9), which remain within the SPC limits. Twenty-eight of the perforations were in parous women, 87% of whom were within 18 weeks of delivery, peaking at 13 weeks postpartum. Twenty of these were in breastfeeding women. In 3/28 cases for which we have outcome data the device was adherent to or had perforated either the bladder or bowel. Conclusion Our perforation rate is consistent with other studies. Most of our perforations were within 18 weeks of childbirth, earlier than in a recent major study. We cannot tell from our data if there is a true peak in perforations 3 months postpartum as that may be a time when a high proportion of insertions are done.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.84
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The trading of Professional, Managerial & Healthcare Publications Ltd has been transferred to its parent company, Keyways Publishing Ltd.
期刊最新文献
The Case of Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis (Abt-Letterer-Siwe Disease) in Twin Girls Multifetal Gestations Planning Methods in Ecuador’s Indigenous People Reproductive Health and Family Planning Services in Africa: Looking beyond Individual and Household Factors The Role of Information Technologies in Natural Family Planning
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1