Menstrual, fertility and psychological impacts after uterine compression sutures for postpartum hemorrhage: a prospective cohort study.
B-lynch suture
Cho suture
Fertility
Hayman suture
Menstruation
Pregnancy
Psychological impact
Uterine compression sutures
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Mar 2023
29 Mar 2023
Historique:
received:
19
12
2022
accepted:
20
03
2023
medline:
31
3
2023
entrez:
29
3
2023
pubmed:
30
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Uterine compression suture is an important conservative surgical technique in managing atonic postpartum hemorrhage. In this study, we aim to evaluate the subsequent menstrual, fertility and psychological outcomes after uterine compression sutures. This was a prospective cohort study between 2009 and 2022 conducted in a tertiary obstetric unit (6000 deliveries per year) in Hong Kong SAR. Women with primary postpartum hemorrhage successfully treated with uterine compression sutures were followed-up in postnatal clinic for two years after delivery. Data on menstrual pattern were collected during each visit. Psychological impact after uterine compression suture was assessed using a standardized questionnaire. Subsequent pregnancies were identified by territory-wide computer registry and telephone interviews. Women with postpartum hemorrhage treated with uterotonic agents only were chosen as controls. In our cohort (n = 80), 87.9% of women had return of menses within six months after delivery. Regular monthly cycle was observed in 95.6% of women. Majority of women reported similar menstrual flow (75%), menstrual days (85.3%) and no change in dysmenorrhea status (88.2%) as compared before. Among eight (11.8%) women who reported hypomenorrhea after uterine compression sutures, two cases of Asherman's syndrome were diagnosed. Among 23 subsequent pregnancies (16 livebirths), no significant differences in outcome were observed except more omental or bowel adhesions (37.5% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.007), recurrence of hemorrhage (68.8% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.001) and repeated compression sutures (12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.024) were seen in women with previous compression sutures. Over half of the couple declined future fertility after uterine compression sutures with 38.2% of women recalled unpleasant memories and 22.1% reported life-long adverse impact especially tokophobia. Majority of women with history of uterine compression sutures had similar menstruation and pregnancy outcomes as compared to those who did not have sutures. However, they had higher intrapartum risk of visceral adhesions, recurrence of hemorrhage and repeated compression sutures next pregnancy. Furthermore, couple could be more susceptible to negative emotional impact.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Uterine compression suture is an important conservative surgical technique in managing atonic postpartum hemorrhage. In this study, we aim to evaluate the subsequent menstrual, fertility and psychological outcomes after uterine compression sutures.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a prospective cohort study between 2009 and 2022 conducted in a tertiary obstetric unit (6000 deliveries per year) in Hong Kong SAR. Women with primary postpartum hemorrhage successfully treated with uterine compression sutures were followed-up in postnatal clinic for two years after delivery. Data on menstrual pattern were collected during each visit. Psychological impact after uterine compression suture was assessed using a standardized questionnaire. Subsequent pregnancies were identified by territory-wide computer registry and telephone interviews. Women with postpartum hemorrhage treated with uterotonic agents only were chosen as controls.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In our cohort (n = 80), 87.9% of women had return of menses within six months after delivery. Regular monthly cycle was observed in 95.6% of women. Majority of women reported similar menstrual flow (75%), menstrual days (85.3%) and no change in dysmenorrhea status (88.2%) as compared before. Among eight (11.8%) women who reported hypomenorrhea after uterine compression sutures, two cases of Asherman's syndrome were diagnosed. Among 23 subsequent pregnancies (16 livebirths), no significant differences in outcome were observed except more omental or bowel adhesions (37.5% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.007), recurrence of hemorrhage (68.8% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.001) and repeated compression sutures (12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.024) were seen in women with previous compression sutures. Over half of the couple declined future fertility after uterine compression sutures with 38.2% of women recalled unpleasant memories and 22.1% reported life-long adverse impact especially tokophobia.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Majority of women with history of uterine compression sutures had similar menstruation and pregnancy outcomes as compared to those who did not have sutures. However, they had higher intrapartum risk of visceral adhesions, recurrence of hemorrhage and repeated compression sutures next pregnancy. Furthermore, couple could be more susceptible to negative emotional impact.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36991358
doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05530-8
pii: 10.1186/s12884-023-05530-8
pmc: PMC10053948
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
217Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Apr 18;16:80
pubmed: 27089951
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013 Apr;92(4):378-85
pubmed: 23330882
BJOG. 2009 Dec;116(13):1815-7
pubmed: 19832829
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010 May;30(4):339-49
pubmed: 20455714
Fertil Steril. 2014 Apr;101(4):1194-9
pubmed: 24534289
Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Mar;104(3):372-5
pubmed: 9091019
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Jun;90(6):615-20
pubmed: 21370999
Int J Obstet Anesth. 2021 Nov;48:103207
pubmed: 34391025
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jun;50(2):179-81
pubmed: 21791304
Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Mar;99(3):506-9
pubmed: 11864682
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Sep;122(3):565-70
pubmed: 23921861
Ceylon Med J. 2011 Sep;56(3):121-3
pubmed: 22164752
BJOG. 2015 Feb;122(3):429-33
pubmed: 25175111
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022 Mar;156(3):475-480
pubmed: 33864681
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020 Nov;46(11):2332-2339
pubmed: 32815234
BJOG. 2011 Mar;118(4):433-9
pubmed: 21199289
BJOG. 2014 Mar;121(4):382-8
pubmed: 24321038
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Feb;38(2):282-284
pubmed: 28901788
Int J Surg Case Rep. 2017;38:5-7
pubmed: 28728102
Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Jul;96(1):129-131
pubmed: 10928901
BJOG. 2010 Jun;117(7):889-91
pubmed: 20406231
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Sep;124(3):558-561
pubmed: 25162256
Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Mar;99(3):502-6
pubmed: 11864681
BMJ Case Rep. 2021 Oct 1;14(10):
pubmed: 34598970
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2015 Apr;41(4):559-64
pubmed: 25331482