Cargando…

The trend in cesarean myomectomies and the risk of obstetrical complications in Korea

BACKGROUND: To evaluate pregnancy outcomes and the risk of adverse obstetrical outcomes of cesarean myomectomy (CM) compared with cesarean section (CS) only, and to investigate the trend of surgeons in choosing CM. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on all patients who underwent CS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Min Jeong, Lee, Kyungeun, Park, Jae Young, Jo, Ji Hye, Park, In Yang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9066846/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35505300
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04674-3
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To evaluate pregnancy outcomes and the risk of adverse obstetrical outcomes of cesarean myomectomy (CM) compared with cesarean section (CS) only, and to investigate the trend of surgeons in choosing CM. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on all patients who underwent CS complicated by leiomyoma at two university hospitals between January 2010 and May 2020. All patients were categorized into the CM (341 women) or CS-only (438 women) group. We analyzed the demographic factors, obstetric factors, surgical outcomes, and possible risk factors for adverse outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: Women who underwent CS only were significantly more likely to have a previous myomectomy and multiple leiomyoma history than women who underwent CM. The gestational age at delivery and pregnancy complications were significantly higher in the CS-only group. The mean size of the leiomyomas was larger in the CM group than in the CS-only group (5.8 ± 3.2 cm vs. 5.2 ± 3.1 cm, P = 0.005). The operation time and history of previous CS and preterm labor were higher in the CM group. The leiomyoma types differed between the two groups. The subserosal type was the most common in the CM group (48.7%), and the intramural type was the most common in the CS-only group. Patients in the CM group had fewer than three leiomyomas than those in the CS-only group. Preterm labor and abnormal presentation were relatively higher in the CM group than in the CS-only group, concerning leiomyoma presence. There were no significant differences in the preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin levels. The size of the leiomyoma (odds ratio [OR] = 1.162; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07–1.25; P < 0.001) and operation time > 60 min (OR = 2.461; 95% CI: 1.45–4.15) were significant independent predictors of adverse outcomes after CM. CONCLUSIONS: CM should be considered a reliable and safe approach to prevent the need for another surgery for remnant leiomyoma. Herein, surgeons performed CM when uterine leiomyomas were large, of the subserosal type, or few. Standardized treatment guidelines for myomectomy during CSs in pregnant women with uterine fibroids should be established.