Weinmann Sheila, Naleway Allison, Swamy Geeta, Krishnarajah Girishanthy, Arondekar Bhakti, Fernandez Jovelle, Myers Evan
The Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 4;12(1):e0165276. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165276. eCollection 2017.
To examine whether surgical procedures involving the uterine cervix were associated with pregnancy outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight, cesarean delivery and pregnancy loss.
Population-based observational study nested in retrospective matched cohort.
Kaiser Permanente Northwest integrated health plan in Oregon/Washington, U.S.A.
Female health plan members age 14-53 years with documented pregnancies from 1998-2009. Women with prior excisional and ablative cervical surgical procedures (N = 322) were compared to women unexposed to cervical procedures (N = 4,307) and, separately, to those having undergone only diagnostic/biopsy procedures (N = 847).
Using log-linear regression models, we examined risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in relation to prior excisional or ablative cervical surgical procedures. We stratified excisional procedures by excision thickness. We evaluated for confounding by age, body mass index, race, smoking history, previous preterm birth, and parity.
We found a positive association between excisional treatment > = 1.0 cm and the outcomes preterm birth and low birth weight (preterm birth unadjusted risk ratio [RR] = 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-3.98 for excisions ≥1.0 cm compared to unexposed women), particularly in women who delivered within one year of surgery (RR = 3.26, 95% CI 1.41-7.53). There was no clear association between excisional treatment and cesarean delivery, and treated women did not have a substantially higher risk of dysfunctional labor. Ablative treatment was not associated with low birth weight, preterm birth, or cesarean delivery but was associated with pregnancy loss (RR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.05-1.93 vs. unexposed women). Analyses using the diagnostic procedures comparison group produced similar results.
Women with > = 1.0 cm excisional treatment had elevated risk of preterm birth and low birth weight when compared to unexposed women and women with cervical diagnostic procedures. This suggests that increased risk derives from the treatment itself, not from other characteristics. The observed association between pregnancy loss and ablative surgical treatment requires further investigation.
探讨涉及子宫颈的外科手术是否与妊娠结局相关,包括早产、低出生体重、剖宫产和妊娠丢失。
基于人群的观察性研究,嵌套于回顾性匹配队列研究中。
美国俄勒冈州/华盛顿州的凯撒永久医疗集团西北综合健康计划。
1998年至2009年期间有妊娠记录的14至53岁女性健康计划成员。将先前接受过子宫颈切除和消融手术的女性(N = 322)与未接受子宫颈手术的女性(N = 4307)进行比较,并分别与仅接受过诊断/活检手术的女性(N = 847)进行比较。
使用对数线性回归模型,我们研究了先前子宫颈切除或消融手术与不良妊娠结局风险之间的关系。我们根据切除厚度对切除手术进行分层。我们评估了年龄、体重指数、种族、吸烟史、既往早产史和产次的混杂情况。
我们发现切除治疗≥1.0 cm与早产和低出生体重结局之间存在正相关(与未暴露女性相比,切除≥1.0 cm的早产未调整风险比[RR] = 2.15,95%置信区间[CI] 1.16 - 3.98),特别是在手术一年内分娩的女性中(RR = 3.26,95% CI 1.41 - 7.53)。切除治疗与剖宫产之间没有明显关联,接受治疗的女性发生功能失调性宫缩的风险也没有显著升高。消融治疗与低出生体重、早产或剖宫产无关,但与妊娠丢失有关(与未暴露女性相比,RR = 1.43,95% CI 1.05 - 1.93)。使用诊断手术比较组进行的分析产生了类似的结果。
与未暴露女性和接受子宫颈诊断手术的女性相比,接受≥1.0 cm切除治疗的女性早产和低出生体重风险升高。这表明风险增加源于治疗本身,而非其他特征。观察到的妊娠丢失与消融手术治疗之间的关联需要进一步研究。