产后出血一直是导致我国孕产妇死亡的首要原因。近20年，我国因产后出血导致的孕产妇死亡虽然已经大幅减少，但仍有进一步下降的空间。产后出血导致孕产妇死亡的主要原因在于诊断和治疗的延迟，错过抢救时机。继2009年《产后出血预防与处理指南（草案）》和2014年《产后出血预防与处理指南（2014）》发布之后，中华医学会妇产科学分会产科学组联合中华医学会围产医学分会基于最新的产后出血研究进展，再次对指南进行修订，对产后出血的病因及高危因素、临床表现及诊断、预防及处理流程进行全面阐述，并提出重要推荐。新版指南强调产后出血处理的“四早原则”——尽早呼救及团队抢救、尽早综合评估及动态监测、尽早针对病因止血和尽早容量复苏及成分输血，避免错过抢救时机而导致孕产妇发生严重并发症甚至死亡。.

To compare guidelines from eight high-income countries on prevention and management of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), with a particular focus on severe PPH.
Comparative study.
High-resource countries.
Women with PPH.
Systematic comparison of guidance on PPH from eight high-income countries.
Definition of PPH, prophylactic management, measurement of blood loss, initial PPH-management, second-line uterotonics, non-pharmacological management, resuscitation/transfusion management, organisation of care, quality/methodological rigour.
Our study highlights areas where strong evidence is lacking. There is need for a universal definition of (severe) PPH. Consensus is required on how and when to quantify blood loss to identify PPH promptly. Future research may focus on timing and sequence of second-line uterotonics and non-pharmacological interventions and how these impact maternal outcome. Until more data are available, different transfusion strategies will be applied. The use of clear transfusion-protocols are nonetheless recommended to reduce delays in initiation. There is a need for a collaborative effort to develop standardised, evidence-based PPH guidelines.
Definitions of (severe) PPH varied as to the applied cut-off of blood loss and incorporation of clinical parameters. Dose and mode of administration of prophylactic uterotonics and methods of blood loss measurement were heterogeneous. Recommendations on second-line uterotonics differed as to type and dose. Obstetric management diverged particularly regarding procedures for uterine atony. Recommendations on transfusion approaches varied with different thresholds for blood transfusion and supplementation of haemostatic agents. Quality of guidelines varied considerably.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

To assess the studies comparing induction methods in women with term prelabor rupture of the membranes and establish if one is superior to the others.
The MedLine database, the Cochrane Library and the recommendations from the French and foreign obstetrical societies or colleges have been consulted.
The included studies compared medical induction methods: oxytocin (intravenous), dinoprostone (vaginal gel, pessary or intracervical gel), and misoprostol (oral or vaginal route); and a mechanical induction method: the Foley catheter. The primary outcome measures were: labor induction to delivery interval, number of women delivered within 12 or 24hours of initiation of induction and cesarean delivery rate. The small sample size of the included studies as well as the limited number of reported complications does not provide a reasonable basis for concluding on the secondary outcome measures: pyrexia, chorioamnionitis, uterine tachysystole, Apgar scores of<7 at 5minutes. Induction of labor with misoprostol (oral and vaginal) reduced the labor induction to delivery interval compared with dinoprostone (LE2). This interval was unchanged when comparing induction with oxytocin and Foley catheter (LE2). The data comparing this interval in women induced with dinoprostone versus oxytocin and misoprostol versus oxytocin is limited or inconsistent. The cesarean delivery rate was comparable in women induced with dinoprostone (vaginal gel) versus oxytocin (LE2), misoprostol (oral and vaginal route) versus oxytocin (LE2), Foley catheter versus oxytocin (LE2), misoprostol versus dinoprostone (LE2) and misoprostol versus Foley catheter (LE2). The number of women delivered within 24hours of initiation of induction was comparable when induced with oral misoprostol versus oxytocin (LE2) and Foley catheter versus oxytocin (LE2). There is a lack of data for this outcome when comparing dinoprostone versus oxytocin, vaginal misoprotsol versus oxytocin, and misoprostol (oral and vaginal) versus dinoprostone. No induction method is superior to another for nulliparous women or women with unfavorable cervix (LE2).
The superiority of an induction method, in terms of effectiveness or safety, could not be established with the current available data for women with term prelabor rupture of the membranes. An increased risk of chorioamnionitis due to induction using Foley catheter could not be ruled out by the available data. All medical methods are suitable for inducing women with term prelabor rupture of the membranes (Grade B).

To determine the management of patients with term prelabor rupture of membranes.
Synthesis of the literature from the PubMed and Cochrane databases and the recommendations of French and foreign societies and colleges.
Term prelabor rupture of membranes is considered a physiological process up to 12hours of rupture (Professional consensus). In case of expectant management and with a low rate of antibiotic prophylaxis, home care compared to hospitalization could be associated with an increase in neonatal infections (LE3), especially in case of group B streptococcus colonization (LE3). Home care is therefore not recommended (Grade C). In the absence of spontaneous labor within 12hours of rupture, antibiotic prophylaxis could reduce the risk of maternal intrauterine infection but not of neonatal infection (LE3). Its use after 12hours of rupture in term prelabor rupture of the membranes is therefore recommended (Grade C). When antibiotic prophylaxis is indicated, intravenous beta-lactams are recommended (Grade C). Induction of labor with oxytocin (LE1), prostaglandin E2 (LE1) or misoprostol (LE1), is associated with shorter rupture of membranes to delivery intervals when compared to expectant management. Compared with expectant management, immediate induction of labor is not associated with lower rates of neonatal infection (LE1), even among women with a positive streptococcus B vaginal swab (LE2). Thus, expectant management can be offered without increasing the risk of neonatal infection (Grade B). Induction of labor is not associated with an increase or decrease in the cesarean delivery rate (LE2), whatever parity (LE2) or Bishop score at admission (LE3). Induction can thus be proposed without increasing the risk of cesarean delivery (Grade B). No induction method (oxytocin, dinoprostone, misoprostol or Foley® catheter) has demonstrated superiority over another, whether to reduce rate of intrauterine or neonatal infection, rate of cesarean delivery or to shorten rupture of membranes to delivery intervals regardless of Bishop\'s score and parity.
Term prelabor rupture of membranes is a frequent event. A 12-hour delay without onset of spontaneous labor was chosen to differentiate a physiological condition from a potentially unsafe situation justifying an antibiotic prophylaxis. Expectant management or induction of labor can both be proposed, even in case of positive screening for streptococcus B, depending on the patient\'s wishes and maternity units\' organization (Professional consensus).

To assess the effect of immediate induction versus expectant management on maternal and neonatal outcomes in case of term prelabor rupture of membranes.
We searched Medline Database, Cochrane Library and consulted international guidelines.
In case of term prelabor rupture of membranes, induction of labor is associated with shorter rupture of membranes to delivery intervals when compared to expectant management, if induction is conducted with oxytocin (LE2), prostaglandin E2 (LE2) or misoprostol (LE2), but not when induction is conducted with Foley® catheter (LE2), osmotic dilatator (LE2) or acupuncture (LE2). The strongest evidence to date comes from a large international randomized study, the TERMPROM study, which included over 5000 women between 1992 and 1995. This study compared immediate induction with oxytocin or prostaglandin E2 to expectant management up to 96hours, followed by induction by oxytocin or prostaglandin E2. Immediate induction was not associated with a decreased neonatal infection rate (LE1), even among women with a positive streptococcus B vaginal swab (LE2). Thus, expectant management can be offered without increasing the neonatal infection risk (Grade B). Induction with oxytocin was associated with a decreased risk of intra-uterine infection and postpartum fever in the TERMPROM study (LE2), however, this study had significant limitations concerning this outcome (unknown streptococcus B status and low rate of prophylactic antibiotics), and this association was not found in other smaller studies. This decrease was not observed with induction by prostaglandin E2. In the TERMPROM study, induction was not associated with an increase or decrease in the rate of cesarean section (LE2), whatever the parity (LE2) or Bishop score at admission (LE3). Induction can thus be proposed without increasing the cesarean section risk (Grade B). There is no study evaluating expectant management over 4 days.
In case of term prelabor rupture of membranes, induction can be offered without increasing the cesarean section risk (Grade B). Expectant management can be offered without increasing the neonatal infection risk (Grade B), even among women with a positive streptococcus B vaginal swab (Professional consensus). The optimal moment of induction will therefore be guided by the maternity wards organization and women\'s preference after having informed them of the risks and benefits associated with induction and expectant management (Professional consensus). In case of meconial fluid or term prelabor rupture of membranes>4 days, induction must be offered (Professional consensus).

It is routine to give a uterotonic drug following delivery of the neonate during caesarean section. However, there is much heterogeneity in the relevant research, which has largely been performed in low-risk elective cases or women with uncomplicated labour. This is reflected in considerable variation in clinical practice. There are significant differences between dose requirements during elective and intrapartum caesarean section. Standard recommended doses are higher than required, with the potential for acute cardiovascular adverse effects. We recommend a small initial bolus dose of oxytocin, followed by a titrated infusion. The recommended doses of oxytocin may have to be increased in women with risk factors for uterine atony. Carbetocin at equipotent doses to oxytocin has similar actions, while avoiding the requirement for a continuous infusion after the initial dose and reducing the need for additional uterotonics. As with oxytocin, carbetocin dose requirements are higher for intrapartum caesarean sections. A second-line agent should be considered early if oxytocin/carbetocin fails to produce good uterine tone. Women with cardiac disease may be very sensitive to the adverse effects of oxytocin and other uterotonics, and their management needs to be individualised.

This study aims to investigate the use of oxytocin augmentation during labor in nulliparous women following Zhang\'s guideline or the WHO partograph.
This is a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial in 14 birth-care units in Norway, randomly assigned to either the intervention group, which followed Zhang\'s guideline, or to the control group, which followed the WHO partograph, for labor progression. The participants were nulliparous women who had a singleton full-term fetus in a cephalic presentation and spontaneous onset of labor, denoted as group 1 in the Ten Group Classification System.
Between December 2014 and January 2017, 7277 participants were included. A total of 3219 women (44%) received augmentation with oxytocin during labor. Oxytocin was used in 1658 (42%) women in the Zhang group compared with 1561 (47%) women in the WHO group. The adjusted relative risk for augmentation with oxytocin was 0.98 (95% CI 0.84-1.15; P = .8) in the Zhang vs WHO group, with an adjusted risk difference of -0.8% (95% CI -7.8 to 6.1). The participants in the Zhang group were less likely to be augmented with oxytocin before reaching 6 cm of cervical dilatation (24%) compared with participants in the WHO group (28%), with an adjusted relative risk of 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.94; P = .003). Oxytocin was administered for almost 20 min longer in the Zhang group than in the WHO group, with an adjusted mean difference of 17.9 min (95% CI 2.7-33.1; P = .021). In addition, 19% of the women in the Zhang group and 23% in the WHO group received augmentation with oxytocin without being diagnosed with labor dystocia.
Although no significant difference in the proportion of oxytocin augmentation was observed between the 2 study groups, there were differences in how oxytocin was used. Women in the Zhang group were less likely to receive oxytocin augmentation before 6 cm of cervical dilatation. The duration of augmentation with oxytocin was longer in the Zhang group than in the WHO group.

The worldwide incidence of abnormally invasive placenta is rapidly rising, following the trend of increasing cesarean delivery. It is a heterogeneous condition and has a high maternal morbidity and mortality rate, presenting specific intrapartum challenges. Its rarity makes developing individual expertise difficult for the majority of clinicians. The International Society for Abnormally Invasive Placenta aims to improve clinicians\' understanding and skills in managing this difficult condition. By pooling knowledge, experience, and expertise gained within a variety of different healthcare systems, the Society seeks to improve the outcomes for women with abnormally invasive placenta globally. The recommendations presented herewith were reached using a modified Delphi technique and are based on the best available evidence. The evidence base for each is presented using a formal grading system. The topics chosen address the most pertinent questions regarding intrapartum management of abnormally invasive placenta with respect to clinically relevant outcomes, including the following: definition of a center of excellence; requirement for antenatal hospitalization; antenatal optimization of hemoglobin; gestational age for delivery; antenatal corticosteroid administration; use of preoperative cystoscopy, ureteric stents, and prophylactic pelvic arterial balloon catheters; maternal position for surgery; type of skin incision; position of the uterine incision; use of interoperative ultrasound; prophylactic administration of oxytocin; optimal method for intraoperative diagnosis; use of expectant management; adjuvant therapies for expectant management; use of local surgical resection; type of hysterectomy; use of delayed hysterectomy; intraoperative measures to treat life-threatening hemorrhage; and fertility after conservative management.