Puerperal hysterectomy. Experience at a private institution

Authors

  • Luis E. Tang Ploog Médico gineco-obstetra, Clínica Santa Isabel, Lima, Perú
  • Roberto Albinagorta Olórtegui Médico gineco-obstetra, Clínica Santa Isabel, Lima, Perú

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31403/rpgo.v59i35

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the experience with puerperal hysterectomy in a private institution. Design: Retrospective, series of cases study. Setting: Clinica Santa Isabel, Lima, Peru. Participants: Women in the immediate post partum. Interventions: Between January 1 2000 and December 31 2011, from 15 201 births attended sixteen 29-42 year-old patients with puerperal hysterectomy (1.04 per thousand births) were studied. Main outcome measures: Frequency, indications and complications of puerperal hysterectomy. Results: History of uterine instrumentation either cesarean section or dilatation and curettage was present in 75%, and the procedure was performed in 12 cases during the cesarean section, three in the post partum and one following dilatation and curettage for 24 weeks immature delivery. It was an emergency in 68.8% and in a similar percentage total hysterectomy was performed. Most frequent indications were placenta accreta in six patients, uterine atony in five and uterine leiomiomatosis in other five (elective interventions). Surgical time was 65-170 minutes, media 105 minutes; blood transfusions were indicated in 9 patients (56.3%). No urinary tract or intestinal tract lesions were reported, and there was no maternal death. Conclusions: Puerperal hysterectomy was an apparently safe procedure at our institution, and frequency, indications and complications were similar to literature reports. Keywords: Puerperal hysterectomy, placenta accreta, uterine atony.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Witheman MK, Kuklina E, Hillis SD, Jamieson DJ, Meikle SF, Posner SF, Marchbanks PA. Incidence and determinants of peripartum hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:1486-92.

Wright JD, Devine P, Shah M, Gaddipati S, Lewin SN, Simpson LL, Bonano C, Sun X, D Alton ME, Herzog TJ. Morbidity and mortality of peripartum hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:1187-93.

Rossi Ac, Lee RH, Chmait RH. Emergency post-partum hysterectomy for uncontrolled postpartum bleeding. A systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:637-44.

Plauche W, Morrison J, O Sullivan MJ. Surgical Obstetrics. WB Saunders Company. 1992.

Chestnut DH, Eden R, Call SA, Parker RT. Peripartum hysterectomy: A review of cesarean and postpartum hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;65:365-70.

Rock–Jones III. Te Linde: Ginecología Quirúrgica. 10º edición. Editorial Médica Panamericana. 2008:830-4.

Glaze S, Ekwalanga P, Roberts G, Lange I, Birch C, Rosengarten A, Jarrel J, Ross S. Peripartum hysterectomy (1999 to 2006). Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:732-8.

Knight M, Kurinczuk JJ, Spark P, Brocklehurst P. Cesarean delivery and peripartum hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:97-105

Zelop CM, Harlow BL, Frigoletto Jr. FD, Safon LE, Saltzman DH. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;168:1443-8.

Forna F, Miles AM, Jamiesson DJ. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: a comparison of cesarean and postpartum hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190:1440-4.

Stanco LM, Schrimmer DB, Paul RH, Mishell Jr DR. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy and associated risk factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;168:879-83.

Bateman BT, Mhyre JM, Callaghan WM, Kuklina EW. Peripartum hysterectomy in the United States: nationwide 14 years experience. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:63e1-8.

Miller DA, Chollet JA, Goodwin TM. Clinical risk factors for placenta previa-placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177:210-4.

Seago PD, Roberts WE, Johnson VK, Martin RW, Morrison JC, Martin Jr. JN. Planned cesarean hysterectomy: a preferred alternative to separate operations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:1385-93.

Published

2013-10-05

How to Cite

Ploog, L. E. T., & Olórtegui, R. A. (2013). Puerperal hysterectomy. Experience at a private institution. The Peruvian Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 59(3), 199–202. https://doi.org/10.31403/rpgo.v59i35

Issue

Section

Artículos Originales