MAKAT PREZENTASYON NEDENİYLE SEZARYEN DOĞUM YAPAN KADINLARIN RETROSPEKTİF DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ VE PREDİSPOZAN FAKTÖRLERİN İNCELENMESİ

Year 2022, Volume: 24 Issue: 3, 533 - 538, 31.12.2022

Kemal Atasayan , Ali Gürsoy

https://doi.org/10.24938/kutfd.1146741

Abstract

Amaç: Sezaryen ile makat prezentasyonda doğum yapan gebeleri ve makat prezentasyona predispozan faktörleri incelemek
Gereç ve yöntemler: Retrospektif olarak Nisan 2019-Eylül 2021 tarihleri arasında hastanemizde gerçekleşen canlı, tekil 1711 doğum incelendi. Makat prezentasyonla sezaryen doğum yapan 78 hasta analiz edildi. Hastaların tıbbi kayıtları geriye dönük taranarak yaşı, gravidası, paritesi, kaçıncı sezaryeni olduğu, ek hastalık olup olmadığı, bebekle ilgili cinsiyeti, doğum ağırlığı, boyu, baş çevresi, APGAR’ı, doğum haftası ve yeni doğan yoğun bakım ihtiyacı olup olmadığı gibi bilgiler kaydedildi. Elde edilen bilgiler karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edildi.
Bulgular: Makat prezentasyon oranı tüm canlı doğumlarda %4,5 olarak saptandı. Makat prezentasyon grubundaki bebeklerin ortalama doğum haftası, ağırlığı ve boyu vertex prezentasyon doğan bebeklere göre anlamlı (p<0.05) olarak daha düşüktü. Makat prezentasyon grubunda nulliparite oranı, geçirilmiş sezeryan oranı vertex prezentasyon grubundan anlamlı olarak daha yüksekti (p<0.05). Daha önce geçirilmiş sezaryeni bulunan kadınlar arasında yapılan analizde makat prezentasyon oranı geçirilmiş sezaryenı olmayanlara göre anlamlı olarak daha düşük saptandı (p<0,05).
Sonuç: Makat prezentasyon gebelikler yaratabileceği gestasyonel komplikasyonlar, fetal sonuçlar ve altta yatan patolojiler olabilmesi nedeniyle yakın takip edilmesi gereken bir gebelik grubudur.

Keywords

makat prezentasyon, sezaryen doğum, gebelik

Retrospective Evaluation of Women Who Had Cesarean Section Due to Breech Presentation and Examination of Predisposing Factors

Abstract

Objective: Investigate pregnant women who had cesarean section due to breech presentation and evaluate the factors predisposing to breech presentation.
Material and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 1711 single live births in our hospital between April 2019 and September 2021. Seventy eight patients who had cesarean section with breech presentation were investigated. The medical records of the patients were scanned retrospectively, and data such as age, gravida, parity, number of previous cesarean section, chronic diseases of the mother, gender, birth weight, height, head circumference, APGAR score, gestational week at birth, and need for neonatal intensive care of the baby were recorded. All data were analyzed comparatively.
Results: The breech presentation rate was found to be 4.5% in all live births. The mean birth week, weight and height of the babies in the breech presentation group were significantly lower than the babies born with vertex presentation (p< 0.05). The nulliparity rate and previous cesarean section rate were significantly higher in the breech presentation group than the vertex presentation group (p < 0.05). In the analysis performed among women with previous cesarean section, breech presentation rate was found to be significantly lower than women without previous cesarean section (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Breech presentation pregnancies should be followed closely because of possible gestational complications, underlying pathologies and adverse fetal outcomes.

Keywords

breech presentation, cesarean section, pregnancy

References

• Hickok DE, Gordon DC, Milberg JA, Williams MA, Daling JR. The frequency of breech presentation by gestational age at birth: a large population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(3):851–2.
• Kotaska A, Menticoglu S, Gagnon R. Vaginal delivery of breech presentation. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009;31(6):557-66.
• Kayem G, Baumann R, Goffinet F, El Abiad S, Ville Y, Cabrol D et al. Early Preterm breech delivery: is a policy of planned vaginal delivery associated with increased risk of neonatal death? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(3):289.e1-6.
• Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet. 2000;356(9239):1375-83.
• Sananès N. Breech presentation: CNGOF guidelines for clinical practice – benefits and risks for the neonate and child of planned vaginal delivery versus elective cesarean section. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2020;48(1):95–108.
• Goffinet F, Carayol M, Foidart JM, Alexander S, Uzan S, Subtil D et al. Is planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term still an option? Results of an observational prospective survey in France and Belgium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(4):1002–11.
• Cammu H, Dony N, Martens G, Colman R. Common determinants of breech presentation at birth in singletons: a population-based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;177:106-9.
• Sentilhes L, Schmitz T, Azria E, Gallot D, Ducarme G, Korb D et al. Breech presentation: Clinical practice guidelines from the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;252:599-604.
• Ford JB, Roberts CL, Nassar N, Giles W, Morris JM. Recurrence of breech presentation in consecutive pregnancies. BJOG. 2010;117(7):830–6.
• Fruscalzo A, Londero AP, Salvador S, Bertozzi S, Biasioli A, Della MM et al. New and old predictive factors for breech presentation: our experience in 14 433 singleton pregnancies and a literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(2):167–72.
• Giri A, Srivastav VR, Suwal A, Tuladhar AS. Advanced maternal age and obstetric outcome. Nepal Med Coll J. 2013;15(2):87–90.
• Ludford I, Scheil W, Tucker G, Grivell R. Pregnancy outcomes for nulliparous women of advanced maternal age in South Australia, 1998–2008. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;52(3):235–41.
• Witkop CT, Zhang J, Sun W, Troendle J. Natural history of fetal position during pregnancy and risk of nonvertex delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(4):875–80.
• Fox AJS, Chapman MG. Longitudinal ultrasound assessment of fetal presentation: a review of 1010 consecutive cases. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;46(4):341–4.
• Albrechtsen S, Rasmussen S, Dalaker K, Irgens LM. The occurrence of breech presentation in norway 1967–1994. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1998;77(4):410–15.
• Rayl J, Gibson PJ, Hickok DE. A population-based case-control study of risk factors for breech presentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174(1 pt 1):28–32.
• Roberts CL, Algert CS, Peat B, Henderson-Smart D. Small fetal size: a risk factor for breech birth at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1999;67(1):1–8.
• Sherer DM, Spong CY, Minior VK, Salafia CM. Increased incidence of fetal growth restriction in association with breech presentation in preterm deliveries <32 weeks. Am J Perinatol. 1997;14(1):35–7.
• Albrechtsen S, Rasmussen S, Dalaker K, Irgens L. Reproductive career after breech presentation: subsequent pregnancy rates, interpregnancy interval and recurrence. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92(3):345–50.
• Kok M, Cnossen J, Gravendeel L, van der Post J, Opmeer B, Mol BW. Clinical factors to predict the outcome of external cephalic version: a metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(6):630.e1–7.
• Zsirai L, Csákány GM, Vargha P, Fülöp V, Tabák ÁG. Breech presentation: its predictors and consequences. An analysis of the Hungarian Tauffer Obstetric Database (1996-2011). Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(3):347-54.
• Soernes T, Bakke T. The length of the umbilical cord in vertex and breech presentations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;154(5):1086–7.
• Vendittelli F, Rivière O, Crenn-Hébert C, Rozan MA, Maria B, Jacquetin B; AUDIPOG Sentinel Network. Is a breech presentation at term more frequent in women with a history of cesarean delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(5):521.e1-6.
• Kalogiannidis I, Masouridou N, Dagklis T, Masoura S, Goutzioulis M, Prapas Y et al. Previous cesarean section increases the risk for breech presentation at term pregnancy. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2010;37(1):29–32.
• Grimosky ML, Paul RH: Singleton breech presentation in labor experience in 1980. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982; 143(7):733-9
• Stout MJ, Odibo AO, Graseck AS, Macones GA, Crane JP, Cahill AG. Leiomyomas at routine second-trimester ultrasound examination and adverse obstetric outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(5):1056–63.
• Zlopasa G, Skrablin S, Kalafatic D, Banovic V, Lesin J. Uterine anomalies and pregnancy outcome following resectoscope metroplasty. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2007;98(2):129–33.
• Dordevic M, Jovanovic B, Sazdanovic P, Dordevic G. Neonate–newborn condition and prematurity with breech delivery. Med Pregl. 2009;62(9-10):456–60.
• Swedish Collaborative Breech Study Group. Term breech delivery in Sweden: mortality relative to fetal presentation and planned mode of delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005;84(6):593–601.