Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Kingston General Hospital, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
ICES, Toronto, ON, Canada.
BJOG. 2022 May;129(6):908-916. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.17019. Epub 2021 Dec 2.
Caesarean section (CS) is more common following infertility treatment (IT) but the reasons why remain unclear and confounded. The Robson 10-Group Classification System (TGCS) may further explain variation in CS rates. We assessed the association between mode of conception and CS across Robson groups.
Population-based cohort study.
Ontario, Canada, in a public healthcare system.
921 023 births, 2006-2014.
Modified Poisson regression produced relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals, comparing the risk of CS among women with (1) subfertility without IT, (2) non-invasive IT (OI, IUI) or (3) invasive IT (IVF)-each relative to (4) spontaneous conception (SC).
CS rate according to one of four modes of conception, overall and stratified by each of the TGCS groups.
Relative to SC (26.9%), the risk of CS increased in those with subfertility without IT (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.16-1.18), non-invasive IT (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.18-1.24) and invasive IT (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.36-1.42). Within each Robson group, similar patterns of RRs were seen, but with markedly differing rates. For example, in Group 1 (nulliparous, singleton, cephalic at ≥37 weeks, with spontaneous labour), the respective rates were 15.0, 19.4, 18.7 and 21.9%; in Group 2 (nulliparous, singleton, cephalic at ≥37 weeks, without spontaneous labour), the rates were 35.9, 44.4, 43.2 and 54.1%; and in Group 8 (multiple pregnancy), they were 55.9, 67.5, 65.0 and 69.3%, respectively.
CS is relatively more common in women with subfertility and those receiving IT, an effect that persists across Robson groups.
Caesarean delivery is more common in women with infertility independent of demographics and prenatal conditions.
与未接受不孕治疗(infertility treatment,IT)的女性相比,接受不孕治疗后的女性剖宫产(cesarean section,CS)更为常见,但具体原因尚不清楚且存在混淆。罗布斯 10 组分类系统(Robson 10-Group Classification System,TGCS)可能进一步解释了 CS 发生率的差异。我们评估了受孕方式与 Robson 分组之间 CS 发生率的关系。
基于人群的队列研究。
在加拿大安大略省的公共医疗保健系统中。
921023 名 2006 年至 2014 年的分娩女性。
采用改良泊松回归计算风险比(relative risk,RR)和 95%置信区间,比较有(1)亚生育能力而无 IT、(2)非侵入性 IT(OI,IUI)或(3)侵入性 IT(IVF)的女性与(4)自然受孕(spontaneous conception,SC)相比 CS 的风险。
根据四种受孕方式之一的 CS 发生率,总体发生率和按照 TGCS 分组的发生率。
与 SC(26.9%)相比,无 IT 的亚生育能力女性(RR 1.17,95%CI 1.16-1.18)、非侵入性 IT(RR 1.21,95%CI 1.18-1.24)和侵入性 IT(RR 1.39,95%CI 1.36-1.42)患者 CS 的风险增加。在每个 Robson 分组内,RR 模式相似,但发生率差异显著。例如,在第 1 组(初产妇、单胎、头位且≥37 孕周、自发分娩),相应的发生率分别为 15.0%、19.4%、18.7%和 21.9%;在第 2 组(初产妇、单胎、头位且≥37 孕周、无自发分娩),发生率分别为 35.9%、44.4%、43.2%和 54.1%;在第 8 组(多胎妊娠),发生率分别为 55.9%、67.5%、65.0%和 69.3%。
CS 在患有不孕症的女性中更为常见,与人口统计学和产前情况无关。
无论人口统计学和产前状况如何,有不孕史的女性行剖宫产术的比例都相对较高。