• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

计划性剖宫产与计划性阴道分娩的比较:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Planned cesarean delivery vs planned vaginal delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA (Drs Adewale and Varotsis).

Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA (Drs Iyer and Berghella).

出版信息

Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023 Dec;5(12):101186. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101186. Epub 2023 Oct 12.

DOI:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101186
PMID:37838013
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

There are over 145 million births worldwide, with over 30 million cesarean deliveries yearly. There are limited data comparing the perinatal and maternal outcomes between planned cesarean delivery and planned vaginal delivery. This study aimed to evaluate perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality by meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that randomly assigned patients to either planned cesarean delivery or planned vaginal delivery.

DATA SOURCES

Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and the World Health Organization clinical trial databases were searched from inception through August 2022.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared planned cesarean delivery with planned vaginal delivery at any gestational age and for any delivery indication were included.

METHODS

Two authors independently extracted data. PRISMA guidelines were used for data extraction and quality assessment. The primary outcome was perinatal mortality. The summary measures were reported as relative risks or as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models for outcomes.

RESULTS

In 15 primary randomized controlled trials, 3265 patients were randomized to planned cesarean delivery and 3353 to planned vaginal delivery. The incidence of perinatal deaths was not different (1.3% vs 1.3%; relative risk, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-1.52). Planned cesarean delivery was associated with lower neonatal incidences of low umbilical artery pH (0.3% vs 2.4%; relative risk, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.67), birth trauma (0.3% vs 0.7%; relative risk, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.96), tube feeding requirement (2.5% vs 7.1%; relative risk, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.66), and hypotonia (0.4% vs 3.5%; relative risk, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.47), compared to planned vaginal delivery. Chorioamnionitis was less frequent in the planned cesarean delivery group (0.3% vs 1.0%; relative risk, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.98). Wound infection was more common in the planned cesarean delivery group (1.9% vs 1.1%; relative risk, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.52). Lower rates were observed in the planned cesarean delivery group for urinary incontinence at both ≤3 months (8.7% vs 12.2%; relative risk, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.85) and 1 to 2 years (16.9% vs 22%; relative risk, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.88) and for a painful perineum at 2 years (4% vs 6.2%; relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.87) compared to planned vaginal delivery. Among singleton pregnancies, planned cesarean delivery was associated with a lower rate of perinatal death (0.69% vs 1.81%; relative risk, 0.45; 95% confident interval, 0.21-0.93).

CONCLUSION

Planned cesarean delivery and planned vaginal delivery were associated with similar rates of perinatal and maternal mortality in this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Planned cesarean delivery was associated with significant decreases in adverse neonatal outcomes such as low umbilical artery pH, birth trauma, tube feeding requirement, and hypotonia, and significant decreases in chorioamnionitis, urinary incontinence, and painful perineum. Planned vaginal delivery was associated with significant decreases in need for general anesthesia and wound infection. Further randomized trials are needed to assess the risks and benefits of planned cesarean delivery vs planned vaginal delivery in lower-risk patients and in the general population.

摘要

目的

全球每年有超过 1.45 亿次分娩,其中有超过 3000 万次剖宫产。比较计划性剖宫产与计划性阴道分娩的围产儿和产妇结局的相关数据有限。本研究旨在通过对随机对照试验进行荟萃分析来评估围产儿和产妇发病率和死亡率,这些试验随机分配患者接受计划性剖宫产或计划性阴道分娩。

数据来源

从成立到 2022 年 8 月,在 Scopus、PubMed、CINAHL、Cochrane 图书馆和世界卫生组织临床试验数据库中进行了检索。

研究入选标准

纳入比较任何孕龄和任何分娩指征下计划性剖宫产与计划性阴道分娩的随机对照试验。

方法

两名作者独立提取数据。使用 PRISMA 指南进行数据提取和质量评估。主要结局是围产儿死亡率。总结措施以相对风险或均值差及 95%置信区间报告。使用 Mantel-Haenszel 随机效应模型计算结局的汇总优势比和 95%置信区间。

结果

在 15 项主要的随机对照试验中,3265 名患者被随机分配至计划性剖宫产组,3353 名患者被随机分配至计划性阴道分娩组。围产儿死亡的发生率没有差异(1.3%比 1.3%;相对风险,0.71;95%置信区间,0.33-1.52)。与计划性阴道分娩相比,计划性剖宫产与新生儿脐动脉 pH 值较低(0.3%比 2.4%;相对风险,0.18;95%置信区间,0.05-0.67)、分娩创伤(0.3%比 0.7%;相对风险,0.46;95%置信区间,0.22-0.96)、需要管饲喂养(2.5%比 7.1%;相对风险,0.36;95%置信区间,0.19-0.66)和低张力(0.4%比 3.5%;相对风险,0.11;95%置信区间,0.03-0.47)的发生率较低,且绒毛膜羊膜炎的发生率也较低(0.3%比 1.0%;相对风险,0.27;95%置信区间,0.08-0.98)。计划性剖宫产组的伤口感染更常见(1.9%比 1.1%;相对风险,1.61;95%置信区间,1.04-2.52)。在≤3 个月(8.7%比 12.2%;相对风险,0.71;95%置信区间,0.59-0.85)和 1-2 年(16.9%比 22%;相对风险,0.77;95%置信区间,0.67-0.88)时,计划性剖宫产组尿失禁的发生率较低,并且 2 年后会阴部疼痛的发生率也较低(4%比 6.2%;相对风险,0.64;95%置信区间,0.47-0.87)。与计划性阴道分娩相比,在单胎妊娠中,计划性剖宫产与较低的围产儿死亡率相关(0.69%比 1.81%;相对风险,0.45;95%置信区间,0.21-0.93)。

结论

在这项随机对照试验的荟萃分析中,计划性剖宫产与计划性阴道分娩与相似的围产儿和产妇死亡率相关。与计划性阴道分娩相比,计划性剖宫产与新生儿脐动脉 pH 值较低、分娩创伤、管饲喂养需求和低张力等不良新生儿结局的发生率显著降低,与绒毛膜羊膜炎、尿失禁和会阴部疼痛的发生率显著降低有关。与计划性阴道分娩相比,计划性剖宫产需要全身麻醉和伤口感染的发生率显著降低。需要进一步的随机试验来评估在低风险患者和一般人群中计划性剖宫产与计划性阴道分娩的风险和益处。

相似文献

1
Planned cesarean delivery vs planned vaginal delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.计划性剖宫产与计划性阴道分娩的比较:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023 Dec;5(12):101186. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101186. Epub 2023 Oct 12.
2
Amnioinfusion for chorioamnionitis.羊膜腔灌注治疗绒毛膜羊膜炎。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Aug 24;2016(8):CD011622. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011622.pub2.
3
Planned early delivery versus expectant management for hypertensive disorders from 34 weeks gestation to term.孕34周直至足月时高血压疾病的计划早产与期待治疗对比
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 15;1(1):CD009273. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009273.pub2.
4
Planned birth at or near term for improving health outcomes for pregnant women with gestational diabetes and their infants.在足月或接近足月时计划分娩,以改善患有妊娠期糖尿病的孕妇及其婴儿的健康结局。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 5;1(1):CD012910. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012910.
5
Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.引产以改善足月及过期妊娠女性的分娩结局。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 9;5(5):CD004945. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub4.
6
Planned early birth versus expectant management for women with preterm prelabour rupture of membranes prior to 37 weeks' gestation for improving pregnancy outcome.对于妊娠37周前胎膜早破的孕妇,计划早产与期待治疗以改善妊娠结局的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 3;3(3):CD004735. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004735.pub4.
7
Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more).足月(37周及以上)胎膜早破时计划早产与期待治疗(等待)的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 4;1(1):CD005302. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005302.pub3.
8
Maternal and neonatal outcomes of elective induction of labor.择期引产的母婴结局
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2009 Mar(176):1-257.
9
Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery for preterm birth in singletons.单胎早产剖宫产与阴道分娩的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13;6(6):CD000078. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000078.pub2.
10
Immediate versus deferred delivery of the preterm baby with suspected fetal compromise for improving outcomes.对于疑似有胎儿窘迫的早产婴儿,立即分娩与延迟分娩以改善结局的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jul 12;7(7):CD008968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008968.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
US Neonatal Mortality From Perinatal Causes.美国围产期原因导致的新生儿死亡率。
JAMA Pediatr. 2025 Aug 1;179(8):918-919. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.1710.
2
Reaching caesarean section rates below 15%: experience of a French tertiary maternity using the Robson classification system.将剖宫产率降至15%以下:一家法国三级妇产医院采用罗布森分类系统的经验
Reprod Health. 2025 Jun 6;22(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s12978-025-02052-8.
3
Maternal demography, clinical characteristics, & outcomes at an obstetric intensive care unit of a tertiary-care teaching maternity hospital in the Kashmir Valley.
克什米尔山谷一家三级护理教学妇产医院产科重症监护病房的孕产妇人口统计学、临床特征及结局
Indian J Med Res. 2025 Mar;161(3):278-286. doi: 10.25259/IJMR_1081_2024.
4
Association of Robson Ten Group Classification System with neonatal/postneonatal mortality: an analysis for the effect of the mass migration.罗布森十组分类系统与新生儿/新生儿后期死亡率的关联:大规模迁移影响的分析
AJOG Glob Rep. 2025 Feb 21;5(2):100464. doi: 10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100464. eCollection 2025 May.
5
Determinants of Neonatal Mortality at a Referral Paediatric Hospital in Angola: A Case-Control Study Using Theoretical Frameworks.安哥拉一家转诊儿科医院新生儿死亡率的决定因素:一项运用理论框架的病例对照研究
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Nov 30;21(12):1609. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21121609.
6
Predicting purulent meningitis in very preterm infants: a novel clinical model.预测极早产儿的化脓性脑膜炎:一种新型临床模型。
BMC Pediatr. 2025 Jan 4;25(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s12887-024-05349-y.