Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2022; 44(01): 003-009
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1736303
Original Article
Obstetrics

Peripartum Hysterectomy: Is There Any Difference Between Emergency and Planned Surgeries?

Histerectomia periparto: Existe alguma diferença entre as cirurgias de emergência e planejada?
Tufan Oge 
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of of Medicine, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
,
Vehbi Yavuz Tokgoz 
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of of Medicine, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
,
Yusuf Cakmak 
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of of Medicine, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
,
Melih Velipasaoglu 
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of of Medicine, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To compare the outcomes of emergency and planned peripartum hysterectomies.

Methods The present retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in two hospitals. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared according to emergency and planned peripartum hysterectomies.

Results A total of 34,020 deliveries were evaluated retrospectively, and 66 cases of peripartum hysterectomy were analyzed. Of these, 31 were cases of planned surgery, and 35 were cases of emergency surgery. The patients who underwent planned peripartum hysterectomy had a lower rate of blood transfusion (83.9% versus 100%; p = 0.014), and higher postoperative hemoglobin levels (9.9 ± 1.3 versus 8.3 ± 1.3; p < 0.001) compared with the emergency hysterectomy group. The birth weight was lower, although the appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration (Apgar) scores were higher in the planned surgery group compared with the emergency cases.

Conclusion Planned peripartum hysterectomy with an experienced team results in less need for transfusion and improved neonatal outcomes compared with emergency peripartum hysterectomy.

Resumo

Objetivo Comparar os resultados das histerectomias periparto de emergência e planejada.

Métodos Este estudo transversal retrospectivo foi realizado em dois hospitais. Os resultados maternos e neonatais foram comparados de acordo com as histerectomias periparto de emergência e planejada.

Resultados Um total de 34.020 partos foram avaliados retrospectivamente, e 66 casos de histerectomia periparto foram analisados. Destes, 31 eram casos de cirurgias planejadas, e 35, cirurgias de emergência. As pacientes que foram submetidas à histerectomia periparto planejada tiveram uma taxa menor de transfusão de sangue (83,9% versus 100%; p = 0,014), e níveis mais elevados de hemoglobina pós-operatória (9,9 ± 1,3 versus 8,3 ± 1,3; p < 0,001) em comparação com o grupo de histerectomia de emergência. O peso ao nascer foi menor, embora as pontuações na escala de aparência, frequência cardíaca, irritabilidade reflexa, tônus muscular, e respiração (appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration, Apgar, em inglês) fossem maiores no grupo da cirurgia planejada em comparação com os casos de emergência.

Conclusão A histerectomia periparto planejada com uma equipe experiente resulta em menos necessidade de transfusão e melhora os resultados neonatais em relação à histerectomia periparto de emergência.

Keywords

abnormal placentation - emergency - peripartum hysterectomy - planned - uterine atony

Palavras-chave

placentação anormal - de emergência - histerectomia periparto - planejada - atonia uterina

Contributors

All authors participated in the concept and design of the study, as well as in the analysis and interpretation of data, draft or revision of the manuscript, and they have approved the manuscript as submitted. All authors are responsible for the reported research.




Publication History

Received: 21 February 2020

Accepted: 09 August 2021

Article published online:
29 January 2022

© 2022. Federação Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Sturdee DW, Rushton DI. Caesarean and post-partum hysterectomy 1968-1983. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986; 93 (03) 270-274
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Umezurike CC, Feyi-Waboso PA, Adisa CA. Peripartum hysterectomy in Aba southeastern Nigeria. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 48 (06) 580-582
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Sharma B, Sikka P, Jain V, Jain K, Bagga R, Suri V. Peripartum hysterectomy in a tertiary care hospital: Epidemiology and outcomes. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2017; 33 (03) 324-328
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Cho GJ, Kim LY, Hong HR, Lee CE, Hong SC, Oh MJ. et al. Trends in the rates of peripartum hysterectomy and uterine artery embolization. PLoS One 2013; 8 (04) e60512
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Zelop CM, Harlow BL, Frigoletto Jr FD, Safon LE, Saltzman DH. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 168 (05) 1443-1448
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 van den Akker T, Brobbel C, Dekkers OM, Bloemenkamp KWM. Prevalence, indications, risk indicators, and outcomes of emergency peripartum hysterectomy worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 128 (06) 1281-1294
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Zeteroglu S, Ustun Y, Engin-Ustun Y, Sahin G, Kamaci M. Peripartum hysterectomy in a teaching hospital in the eastern region of Turkey. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005; 120 (01) 57-62
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Chestnut DH, Eden RD, Gall SA, Parker RT. Peripartum hysterectomy: a review of cesarean and postpartum hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 65 (03) 365-370
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Langhoff-Roos J, Chantraine F, Geirsson RT. AIP (abnormally invasive placenta)–from a retained placenta to destruction of the uterine wall. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92 (04) 367-368
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee opinion no. 529: placenta accreta. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (01) 207-211
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Briery CM, Rose CH, Hudson WT, Lutgendorf MA, Magann EF, Chauhan SP. et al. Planned vs emergent cesarean hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197 (02) 154.e1-154.e5
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Kazi S. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: A great obstetric challenge. Pak J Med Sci 2018; 34 (06) 1567-1570
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Velipasaoglu M, Senturk M, Tanir HM. [Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: 20-year experience of a University Hospital]. Akd Med J. 2017; 3 (03) 165-169 Turkish.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Tapisiz OL, Altinbas SK, Yirci B, Cenksoy P, Kaya AE, Dede S. et al. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy in a tertiary hospital in Ankara, Turkey: a 5-year review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012; 286 (05) 1131-1134
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Yalinkaya A, Güzel AI, Kangal K. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: 16-year experience of a medical hospital. J Chin Med Assoc 2010; 73 (07) 360-363
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Güngördük K, Yildirim G, Dugan N, Polat I, Sudolmus S, Ark C. Peripartum hysterectomy in Turkey: a case-control study. J Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 29 (08) 722-728
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Senturk MB, Cakmak Y, Guraslan H, Dogan K. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: 2-year experiences in non-tertiary center. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015; 292 (05) 1019-1025
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Huque S, Roberts I, Fawole B, Chaudhri R, Arulkumaran S, Shakur-Still H. Risk factors for peripartum hysterectomy among women with postpartum haemorrhage: analysis of data from the WOMAN trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018; 18 (01) 186
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Flood KM, Said S, Geary M, Robson M, Fitzpatrick C, Malone FD. Changing trends in peripartum hysterectomy over the last 4 decades. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200 (06) 632.e1-632.e6
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Sahin S, Guzin K, Eroğlu M, Kayabasoglu F, Yaşartekin MS. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: our 12-year experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014; 289 (05) 953-958
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Hsu YR, Kung FT, Roan CJ, Ou CY, Hsu TY. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy due to placenta previa/accreta: 10 years' experience. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 43 (04) 206-210
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Hernandez JS, Wendel Jr GD, Sheffield JS. Trends in emergency peripartum hysterectomy at a single institution: 1988-2009. Am J Perinatol 2013; 30 (05) 365-370
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Arulpragasam K, Hyanes G, Epee-Bekima M. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy in a Western Australian population: Ten-year retrospective case-note analysis. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2019; 59 (04) 533-537
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Rahman J, Al-Ali M, Qutub HO, Al-Suleiman SS, Al-Jama FE, Rahman MS. Emergency obstetric hysterectomy in a university hospital: A 25-year review. J Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 28 (01) 69-72
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Seoud MA, Nasr R, Berjawi GA, Zaatari GS, Seoud TM, Shatila AS. et al. Placenta accreta: Elective versus emergent delivery as a major predictor of blood loss. J Neonatal Perinatal Med 2017; 10 (01) 9-15
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Wei Q, Zhang W, Chen M, Zhang L, He G, Liu X. Peripartum hysterectomy in 38 hospitals in China: a population-based study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014; 289 (03) 549-553
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Sak S, Barut M, Incebiyik A, Uyanikoglu H, Hilali N, Sak M. Management of peripartum hysterectomies performed on patients with placenta percreta in a tertiary central hospital. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019; 32 (06) 883-888
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Pettit KE, Stephenson ML, Truong YN, Henry D, Murphy A, Kim L. et al; University of California Fetal Consortium. Maternal and neonatal outcomes among scheduled versus unscheduled deliveries in women with prenatally diagnosed, pathologically proven placenta accreta. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019; 32 (06) 927-931
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Robinson BK, Grobman WA. Effectiveness of timing strategies for delivery of individuals with placenta previa and accreta. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116 (04) 835-842
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Silver RM, Fox KA, Barton JR, Abuhamad AZ, Simhan H, Huls CK. et al. Center of excellence for placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212 (05) 561-568
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar