SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Zeynep Kamil Tıp Bülteni / 2008 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 2

The effect of occiput posterior presentation on obstetric prognosis and postpartum neurodevelopmental process

Oksiput posterior prezentasyonun obstetrik prognoz ve postpartum nörogelişimsel sürece etkisi

Bülent TANDOĞAN
Ebru GÜRLEYİĞ
Uğraş UÇAR
Habibe AYVACI
Vedat DAYICIOĞLU
Pages
45–49
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)

However, ifa larger group of babies were evaluated with long-term follow-up different outcomes may be reported.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of occiput posterior presentation on obstetric outcome and baby's neurologic development at vaginal delivery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Between January 1999 and December 2000, 141 patients that had occiput posterior(OP) vaginal deliveries were compared to 199 patients that delivered vaginally as occiput anterior(OA) with respect to presence ofepisiotomy vacuum forceps application, meconium presence, apgar scores and babies's neurological development.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, ifa larger group of babies were evaluated with long-term follow-up different outcomes may be reported.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Doğum · obstetrik · Doğum prezentasyonu

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of occiput posterior presentation on obstetric outcome and baby's neurologic development at vaginal delivery. Material and Methods: Between January 1999 and December 2000, 141 patients that had occiput posterior(OP) vaginal deliveries were compared to 199 patients that delivered vaginally as occiput anterior(OA) with respect to presence ofepisiotomy vacuum forceps application, meconium presence, apgar scores and babies's neurological development. Babies's neurological development evaluated with Denver II Developmental Screening test. Results: Episiotomies was performed in 92(65.2%) of the patients with OP deliveries and 88(44.2%) of the patients with O A deliveries. The difference was found statistically significant(p0.05). Conclusion: The proportion ofepisiotomy, vacuum andforcesps delivery is statistically increasing in OP deliviries. We found no difference between OP and OA groups regarding their neurological development. However, ifa larger group of babies were evaluated with long-term follow-up different outcomes may be reported.

Özet

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı vajinal doğumda oksiput posterior prezentasyonun obstetrik prognoz ve bebeklerin nörolojik gelişimi üzerine etkisini araştırmaktır. Materyel ve Metod: Ocak 1999 ve Aralık 2000 tarihleri arasında hastanemizde vajinal yolla gerçekleşen 141 oksiput posterior (OP) ve 199 oksiput anterior (OA) doğum olgusu epizyotomi, vakum forseps uygulanması, mekonyum varlığı ve apgar skorları ile bebeklerin nörolojik gelişimi açısından karşılaştırıldı. Bebeklerin nörolojik gelişimi Denver II Gelişimsel Tarama testi ile değerlendirildi. Bulgular: OP grupta 92(%65.2) gebeye epizyotomi uygulanırken, OA grupta 88(%44.2) gebeye epizyotomi uygulandı. Aradaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu(p0.05). Sonuç: OP doğumlarda epizyotomi ve müdahaleli doğum oranı OA doğumlara göre anlamlı derecede artmaktadır. OP ve OA doğan bebekler arasında nörolojik gelişim açısından anlamlı farklılık bulunmamıştır. Ancak daha büyük bir olgu grubu, gözlem süresi uzatılarak değerlendirilse daha farklı sonuçlara ulaşılabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TANDOĞAN, B., GÜRLEYİĞ, E., UÇAR, U., AYVACI, H., DAYICIOĞLU, V. (2008). The effect of occiput posterior presentation on obstetric prognosis and postpartum neurodevelopmental process. Zeynep Kamil Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 2, 45–49. https://ajindex.com/articles/335590

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Cunnigham GF, McDonald PC. Mechanism of normal labor in occiput presentation. Williams Obstetrics 20 th edition, Connecticut: Appleton andLange, 1997:319-22 2. Wang KG, Chen CP. Factors influencing the prolonged second stage and the effects on perinatal and matenal outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol 1996;22:25S-57 3. Pearl ML, Roberts JM. Vaginal delivery from the persistent occiput posterior presentation: Influence on maternal and neonatal morbidity. J ReprodMed 1993; 58:95 5 4. Riethmuller D, Teffaud O. Maternal and fetal prognostic of occiputoposterior presantation. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 1999;28:41-7 5. Gerber S, Vial Y, Hohfeld P. Maternal and neonatal prognosis after a prolonged second stage of labor. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 1999;28:145-50 6. Asakura H, Schifrin BS, Myers SA. Intrapartu atraumatic, non-asphyxial intracranial hemorrhage in a full term-infant. Obstet Gynecol 2000,-96:749-52 7. Apak S. Sağlam çocukta nörolojik gelişim Gelişim nörolojisi. 1.baskı İstanbul Üniversitesi Çocuk Sağlığı Enstitüsü Vakfı yayınları İstanbul 1984:29-41 8. Braynt GM, Davies KJ, Newcambe RG. The Denver developmental screening test. Achievement of test items in the first year of life by Denver and Cardiff infants. Developmental medical and neurology 1994; 16:475-84 9. Yalaz k, Epir S. Denver gelişimsel tarama testi Türk çocuklarına. uygulanması ve standardizasyonu. Hacettepe Çocuk Sağlığı Enstitüsü Vakfı, Ankara 1982:5-15 10. Ponkey S, Cohen AP, Heffner LJ, Lieberman E. Persistent fetal occiput posterior position: Obstetric s outcomes. Obste t Gynecol 2003;101:915-20. 11. Akmal S, Kametas N, Tsoi E, Hargreave C, Nicolaides KH. Comparison of transvaginal digital examination with intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head positio n before instrumental delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;21:437-40 12. Senecal J, Xiong X, Eraser WD, for the PEOPLE Study Group. Effect of fetal position on second-stage duration and labor outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105:7 63-72 13. Cheng YW, Shaffer BL,Caughey AB. The association between persistent occiput posterior position and neonatal outcomes: Öbstet Gynecol 2006;107(4): 837-44 14. Floberg J, Belfrage P, Ohlsen H. Influence of the pelvic outlet capacity on fetal head presentation at delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1987;66:127-30 15. Chou MR, Kreiser D, Taslimi MM, Druzin ML, El-Sayed YY. Vaginal versus ultrasound examination of fetal occiput position during the second stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191