Incidence and risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Globally, postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) remains a leading cause of maternal deaths. However in many low and middle income countries, there is scarcity of information on magnitude of and risk factors for PPH (blood loss of 500 ml or more). It is important to understand the relative contributions of different risk factors for PPH. We assessed the incidence of, and risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage among rural women in Uganda. METHODS: Between March 2013 and March 2014, a prospective cohort study was conducted at six health facilities in Uganda. Women were administered a questionnaire to ascertain risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage, defined as a blood loss of 500 mls or more, and assessed using a calibrated under-buttocks drape at childbirth. We constructed two separate multivariable logistic regression models for the variables associated with PPH. Model 1 included all deliveries (vaginal and cesarean sections). Model 2 analysis was restricted to vaginal deliveries. In both models, we adjusted for clustering at facility level. RESULTS: Among the 1188 women, the overall incidence of postpartum hemorrhage was 9.0%, (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.5-10.6%) and of severe postpartum hemorrhage (1000 mls or more) was 1.2%, (95% CI 0.6-2.0%). Most (1157 [97.4%]) women received a uterotonic after childbirth for postpartum hemorrhage prophylaxis. Risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage among all deliveries (model 1) were: cesarean section delivery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.54; 95% CI 4.11-13.81); multiple pregnancy (aOR 2.26; 95% CI 0.58-8.79); foetal macrosomia ≥4000 g (aOR 2.18; 95% CI 1.11-4.29); and HIV positive sero-status (aOR 1.93; 95% CI 1.06-3.50). Risk factors among vaginal deliveries only, were similar in direction and magnitude as in model 1, namely: multiple pregnancy, (aOR 7.66; 95% CI 1.81-32.34); macrosomia, (aOR 2.14; 95% CI1.02-4.47); and HIV positive sero-status (aOR 2.26; 95% CI 1.20-4.25). CONCLUSION: The incidence of postpartum hemorrhage was high in our setting despite use of uterotonics. The risk factors identified could be addressed by extra vigilance during labour and preparedness for PPH management in all women giving birth.

Indução do parto em pacientes com cesárea anterior / Labor induction in patients with prior cesarian section

Quando a paciente tem uma cesárea anterior e está indicada a interrupção da gravidez, há duas possibilidades de conduta: a repetição da cesárea ou a indução do parto. A cesárea iterativa ou a indução do parto em pacientes com cesárea anterior apresentam riscos e benefícios. Uma complicação rara e perigosa, relacionada à presença de uma cicatriz uterina, é a ruptura uterina. Isso pode ocorrer antes ou durante o trabalho de parto em pacientes com cesárea anterior. Os riscos associados a uma tentativa de parto vaginal são maiores do que aqueles decorrentes de cesárea iterativa, mas permanecem baixos. Acreditamos que, em locais adequados, a indução do parto vaginal após cesárea é uma opção aceitável para mulheres, sem apresentar contraindicações, e é uma conduta obstétrica recomendável.

When a woman has had a previous cesarean section and is indicated interruption of pregnancy, there are two options for her management: elective repeat cesarean or planned induction of labour. Elective repeat caesarean section and induction of labour for women with a prior caesarean are both associated with risks and benefits. One uncommon, but potentially serious complication associated with a prior uterine surgery, including a previous caesarean section, is uterine rupture. This may occur prior to the onset of labour, or during labour in patients with previous cesarean section. The risk associated with an attempted vaginal delivery is greater than the risk associated with an elective repeated cesarean, but it remains low. We believe that, in the appropriate setting, planned induction of labour after a cesarean is an acceptable option for women without other contraindications, and that vaginal birth after a cesarean remains within the standard of care.

Induced labour with prostaglandin E2 in different parity groups after premature rupture of membranes

The study compared the outcome of induction of labour with prostagl and in E2 vaginal tablets in patients with premature rupture of membranes [PROM] at term in different parity groups. A retrospective review was made of the hospital records of 169 women attending the maternity unit of King Faisal Military Hospital, Saudi Arabia. There were no statistically significant differences between the 3 groups [parity 0, parity 1-4 and parity 5+] in rates of labour augmentation, caesarean sections, neonatal intensive care admissions or low Apgar scores. There were no serious complications of induction of labour such as infection or uterine hyperstimulation or rupture. Prostagl and in E2 may be used with care for labour induction in women with PROM at term, even gr and ultiparas, unless there is history of previous caesarean delivery

Vaginal misoprostol in managing premature rupture of membranes

We compared the efficacy of misoprostol with that of prostaglandin E2 in cervical ripening and labour induction. Thus 238 women with rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation without labour were randomized to receive 50 microg misoprostol vaginal gel or 5 mg of prostaglandin E2 gel. Bishop score was evaluated before drug application and 6 hours later. Clinical data and perinatal outcome were recorded. Mean time from induction to delivery and the need for oxytocin were significantly less in the misoprostol group. There were no significant differences in spontaneous labour rate, type of delivery and perinatal outcome. It is concluded that intravaginal misoprostol is safe and more effective than prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening in premature rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation