Smyth Rebecca M D, Markham Carolyn, Dowswell Therese
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 18;2013(6):CD006167. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006167.pub4.
Intentional artificial rupture of the amniotic membranes during labour, sometimes called amniotomy or 'breaking of the waters', is one of the most commonly performed procedures in modern obstetric and midwifery practice. The primary aim of amniotomy is to speed up contractions and, therefore, shorten the length of labour. However, there are concerns regarding unintended adverse effects on the woman and baby.
To determine the effectiveness and safety of amniotomy alone for routinely shortening all labours that start spontaneously.
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2013).
Randomised controlled trials comparing amniotomy alone versus intention to preserve the membranes. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.
Two review authors assessed identified studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat.
We have included 15 studies in this updated review, involving 5583 women. Amniotomy alone versus intention to preserve the membranes (no amniotomy) for spontaneous labour There was no clear statistically significant difference between women in the amniotomy and control groups in length of the first stage of labour (mean difference (MD) -20.43 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) -95.93 to 55.06), caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.63), maternal satisfaction with childbirth experience (MD -1.10, 95% CI -7.15 to 4.95) or Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.00). There was no consistency between trials regarding the timing of amniotomy during labour in terms of cervical dilatation. Amniotomy alone versus intention to preserve the membranes (no amniotomy) for spontaneous labours that have become prolonged There was no clear statistically significant difference between women in the amniotomy and control group in caesarean section (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.15 to 6.08), maternal satisfaction with childbirth experience (MD 22.00, 95% CI 2.74 to 41.26) or Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (RR 2.86, 95% CI 0.12 to 66.11).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the findings of this review, we cannot recommend that amniotomy should be introduced routinely as part of standard labour management and care. We recommend that the evidence presented in this review should be made available to women offered an amniotomy and may be useful as a foundation for discussion and any resulting decisions made between women and their caregivers.
分娩期间故意人工破膜,有时称为羊膜穿刺术或“破水”,是现代产科和助产实践中最常用的操作之一。羊膜穿刺术的主要目的是加速宫缩,从而缩短产程。然而,人们担心这会对产妇和婴儿产生意外不良影响。
确定单纯羊膜穿刺术对常规缩短所有自然发动分娩产程的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2013年4月30日)。
比较单纯羊膜穿刺术与保留胎膜的随机对照试验。我们排除了半随机试验。
两位综述作者评估纳入的研究,评估偏倚风险并提取数据。主要分析采用意向性分析。
在本次更新的综述中,我们纳入了15项研究,涉及5583名女性。自然分娩中单纯羊膜穿刺术与保留胎膜(未行羊膜穿刺术)相比:羊膜穿刺术组和对照组女性在第一产程时长(平均差(MD)-20.43分钟,95%置信区间(CI)-95.93至55.06)、剖宫产(风险比(RR)1.27,95%CI 0.99至1.63)、产妇对分娩体验的满意度(MD -1.10,95%CI -7.15至4.95)或5分钟时阿氏评分低于7分(RR 0.53,95%CI 0.28至1.00)方面,均无明显统计学显著差异。各试验在分娩期间羊膜穿刺术的时机(根据宫颈扩张情况)方面缺乏一致性。产程延长的自然分娩中单纯羊膜穿刺术与保留胎膜(未行羊膜穿刺术)相比:羊膜穿刺术组和对照组女性在剖宫产(RR 0.95,95%CI 0.15至6.08)、产妇对分娩体验的满意度(MD 22.00,95%CI 2.74至41.26)或5分钟时阿氏评分低于7分(RR 2.86,95%CI 0.12至66.11)方面,均无明显统计学显著差异。
基于本综述的结果,我们不建议将羊膜穿刺术作为标准分娩管理和护理的常规部分引入。我们建议将本综述中的证据提供给接受羊膜穿刺术的女性,这可能有助于女性与其护理人员之间进行讨论并做出最终决策。