论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨母胎Holter监护在产科中的应用,分析无应激试验(NST)中心电各参数的意义。方法传统电子胎心监护(EFM)NST无反应型为试验组,反应型为对照组,均进行母胎Holter监护,对两组的临床情况和母胎Holter监护中的各参数进行分析。结果试验组39例,对照组49例。两组孕妇的基本情况、分娩方式、出现胎儿宫内窘迫(胎心型)及羊水III度污染的差异无统计学意义。试验组每小时加速次数(LA)[(3.5±2.8)次/h]远低于对照组[(7.7±3.7)次/h],试验组短变异(STV)[(7.43±1.60)ms]低于对照组[(8.94±2.22)ms],差异均有统计学意义(P<0.001);而两组中减速力(DC)和加速力(AC)的差异无统计学意义,所有胎儿的胎心率基线(BFHR)与DC两参数间存在显著负相关(r=-0.507,P<0.001)。结论母胎Holter监护的优势在于可长时间监测胎儿宫内情况,将图形数据转化为客观指标,NST无反应型的LA、STV值明显低于反应型。
Objective To investigate the application of Holter monitoring in obstetrics, and to analyze the significance of various parameters of central electricity in non-stress test (NST). Methods The conventional non-responders of fetal electronic fetal heart monitor (EFM) were the experimental group and the reactive type as the control group. All patients were monitored by the mother-child Holter, and the clinical parameters and the parameters of the mother’s womb Holter monitoring were analyzed. Results The experimental group 39 cases, control group 49 cases. The two groups of pregnant women basic situation, mode of delivery, fetal distress (fetal heart rate) and amniotic fluid III degree of contamination was no significant difference. The number of accelerations per hour (LA) [(3.5 ± 2.8) times / h] in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group [7.7 ± 3.7 / h] and the STV was [7.43 ± 1.60 ms] (8.94 ± 2.22) ms, the differences were statistically significant (P <0.001). There was no significant difference in deceleration force (DC) and acceleration force (AC) between the two groups There was a significant negative correlation between fetal heart rate baseline (BFHR) and DC parameters (r = -0.507, P <0.001). Conclusion The advantage of Holter monitoring is that the intrauterine situation can be monitored for a long time, and the data of the fetus can be transformed into the objective indexes. The non-responsive LA of NST is obviously lower than that of reactive type.