Journals / Meandros Medical And Dental Journal / 2015 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2

Apandisit ile Komplike Gebeliklerin Cerrahi Tedavisi ve Gebelik Sonuçları: Obstetrisyen Görüşü

Pregnancy Outcomes and Surgical Management of Pregnancy Complicated By Appendicitis: Obstetrician View

Pages
43–49
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Obstetric indications were valid for delivery mode

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: To evaluate the pregnancy outcomes of patients who underwent appendectomy during pregnancy.Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent appendectomy between years 2010 and 2014 were retrospectively evaluated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Sixteen of 39 patients were in the first, 15 of them in the second and 8 of them were in the third trimester of the pregnancy.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Obstetric indications were valid for delivery mode
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the pregnancy outcomes of patients who underwent appendectomy during pregnancy.Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent appendectomy between years 2010 and 2014 were retrospectively evaluated. All patients' pregnancy outcomes were followed-up by using university registry system and telephone interview. Patients were evaluated regarding age, gestational age, clinical and laboratory examinations, imaging studies, mean time interval between emergency department and operation, mean operative time, pregnancy outcome and pathologic results of the appendix.Results: Thirty-nine patients were included in the study. Sixteen of 39 patients were in the first, 15 of them in the second and 8 of them were in the third trimester of the pregnancy. Three patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and the rest underwent laparotomy. In pathologic evaluation of the appendix, seven patients (17%) had normal appendix, 4 patients had perforated appendix, one patient had neuro-endocrine tumor and rest of the patients had appendicitis. Two missed abortion occurred after operation, rest of the patients had live birth. Six of them were preterm and 31 had term birth. Twelve patients delivered through vaginal birth and the rest via caesarean section. Twenty patients were in the first half of the pregnancy (group 1) and 19 patients were in the second half of the pregnancy (group 2). There were no significant differences between the groups in operation time and mean time interval between emergency administration and operation. Conclusion: Delayed operation and negative appendectomy can cause adverse pregnancy outcomes. Expectant management in suspected cases may decrease negative appendectomy rates but can also lead to perforation. Computed tomography and MRI ought to be considered if ultrasonography is inconclusive. Tocolytic regimens can be administered to prevent threatened preterm labor. Obstetric indications were valid for delivery mode

Özet

Amaç: Gebeliğinde apendektomi yapılan hastaların gebelik sonuçlarının değerlendirilmesi.Gereç ve Yöntemler: 2010-2014 yılları arasında apendektomi yapılan hastalar retrospektif olarak incelendi. Tüm hastaların gebelik sonuçları üniversite kayıt sistemi ve telefon görüşmeleri ile takip edildi. Hastalar yaş, gebelik yaşı, klinik ve laboratuvar muayeneleri, görüntüleme çalışmaları, acil servis ve operasyon arasındaki ortalama zaman, ortalama operasyon süresi, gebelik sonucu ve apandiksin patoloji sonucuna göre değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Otuz dokuz hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Otuz dokuz hastanın 16'sı ilk, 15'i ikinci ve 8'i gebeliğin üçüncü trimesterindeydi. Üç hastaya laparoskopik apendektomi kalanlarına laparatomi yapıldı. Apendiksin patolojik değerlendirilmesinde, yedi hasta (17%) normal apendiks, dört hasta perfore apendiks, bir hasta nöro-endokrin tümor ve kalanları apandisit saptandı. Operasyon sonrası iki missed abortus meydana gelirken kalanları canlı doğum yaptı. Bunlardan altısı preterm ve otuz biri term doğum yaptı. On iki hasta vajinal yolla ve kalanları sezaryen yoluyla doğurtuldu. Yirmi hasta gebeliğin birinci yarısında (grup 1) ve 19 hasta gebeliğin ikinci yarısındaydı (grup 2). Gruplar arasında operasyon zamanı ve acile kabul ile operasyon arasındaki ortalama zaman aralığı açısıdan anlamlı farklılık yoktu. Sonuç: Gecikmiş operasyon ve negatif apendektomi olumsuz gebelik sonuçlarına neden olabilir. Şüpheli olgulardaki izlem tedavisi negatif apendektomi oranlarını düşürebilir; ancak aynı zamanda perforasyona neden olabilir. Bilgisayarlı tomografi ve manyetik rezonans görüntüleme, ultrasonografinin net olmadığı zaman düşünülmelidir. Erken doğum tehditini önlemek için tokolitik rejimler uygulanabilir. Doğum şekli için obstetrik endikasyonlar geçerlidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞİMŞEK, D., TURAN, Ö. D., ERGENOĞLU, A. M., DEMİR, H. B., SEZER, T. Ö., ŞAHİN, Ç. (2015). Apandisit ile Komplike Gebeliklerin Cerrahi Tedavisi ve Gebelik Sonuçları: Obstetrisyen Görüşü. Meandros Medical And Dental Journal, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2, 43–49. https://ajindex.com/articles/282848

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Sharp HT. The acute abdomen during pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2002; 45: 405-13.
  2. Upadhyay A, Stanten S, Kazantsev G, Horoupian R, Stanten A. Laparoscopic management of a nonobstetric emergency in the third trimester of pregnancy. Surg Endosc 2007; 21: 1344-8.
  3. Brown JJ, Wilson C, Coleman S, Joypaul BV. Appendicitis in pregnancy: an ongoing diagnostic dilemma. Colorectal Dis 2009; 11: 116-22.
  4. Abbasi N, Patenaude V, Abenhaim HA. Evaluation of obstetrical and fetal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by acute appendicitis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014; 290: 661-7.
  5. Hee P, Viktrup L. The diagnosis of appendicitis during pregnancy and maternal and fetal outcome after appendectomy. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1999; 65: 129-35.
  6. Tracey M, Fletcher HS. Appendicitis in pregnancy. Am Surg 2000; 66: 555-9.
  7. Wittich AC, DeSantis RA, Lockrow EG. Apendectomy during pregnancy: a survey of two army medical activities. Mil Med 1999; 164: 671-4. Babler A. Perforative appendicitis complicating pregnancy. JAMA 1908; 51: 1310-3.
  8. Melnick DM, Wahl WL, Dalton VK. Management of general surgical problems in the pregnant patient. Am J Surg 2004; 187:170-80.
  9. McGory ML, Zingmond DS, Tillou A, Hiatt JR, Ko CY, Cryer HM. Negative appendectomy in pregnant women is associated with a substantial risk of fetal loss. J Am Coll Surg 2007; 205: 534-40.
  10. Hodjati H, Kazerooni T. Location of the appendix in the gravid patient: a re-evaluation of the established concept. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003; 81: 245-7.
  11. Lim HK, Bae SH, Seo GS. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women:value of sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 159:539-42.
  12. Mazze RI, Källén B. Appendectomy during pregnancy: a Swedish registry study of 778 cases. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 77: 835-40.
  13. Yilmaz HG, Akgun Y, Bac B, Celik Y. Acute appendicitis in pregnancy--risk factors associated with principal outcomes: a case control study. Int J Surg 2007; 5: 192-7.
  14. Thompson MM, Kudla AU, Chisholm CB. Appendicitis during pregnancy with a normal MRI. West J Emerg Med 2014; 15: 652-4.
  15. Chen MM, Coakley FV, Kaimal A, Laros RK Jr. Guidelines for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging use during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112: 333- 40. Ames Castro M, Shipp TD, Castro EE, Ouzounian J, Rao P. The use of helical computed tomography in pregnancy for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 184: 954-7.
  16. Lazarus E, Mayo-Smith WW, Mainiero MB, Spencer PK. CT in the evaluation of nontraumatic abdominal pain in pr