Robsonova klasifikácia – cesta k zníženiu počtu cisárskych rezov?

Download PDF English version

Authors: Tomáš Debnár ^1,2; Veronika Kováčová ²; Mária Kubalová ³; Miloš Mlynček ^4,5
Authors‘ workplace: Gyncare s. r. o., Nitra, Slovak Republic ¹; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty Hospital Nitra, Slovak Republic ²; Procare Clinic Nitra, Slovak Republic ³; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Bory, Bratislava, Slovak Republic ⁴; Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Slovak Republic ⁵
Published in: Ceska Gynekol 2025; 90(3): 254-260
Category:
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/cccg2025254

Overview

Stúpajúci počet cisárskych rezov predstavuje závažný zdravotný, ekonomický a psychologický problém v globálnom meradle. Robsonova klasifikácia predstavuje komplexný prístup, ako na pôrodníckych pracoviskách realizovať pravidelne analýzu každého operačného abdominálneho pôrodu. Ukazuje sa, že najmä podpora vaginálnych pôrodov po predošlom cisárskom reze a redukcia cisárskych rezov u primipár je jednou z ciest, ako zastaviť stúpajúci trend cisárskych rezov. Aj slovenské pracoviská, ktoré akceptovali Robsonovu klasifikáciu, vykazujú pokles cisárskych rezov.

Klíčová slova:

cisársky rez – manažment – Robsonova klasifikácia – spôsob pôrodu

Sources

1. Robson MS. Classification of caesarean sections. Fetal Matern Me Rev 2001; 12 (1): 23–39. doi: 10.1017/S0965539501000122.

2. World Health Organisation. The Robson classification implementation manual. 2017 [online]. Available from: https: //www.who.int/news/item/30-11-2017-the-robson-classification-implementation-manual.

3. Robson MS. Can we reduce the caesarean section rate? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 15 (1): 179–194. doi: 10.1053/ beog.2000.0156.

4. World Health Organisation. Statement of caesarean section rates. Reprod Health Matters 149–150. 2015 [online]. Available from: https: //www.who.int/publications/i/item/ WHO- RHR-15.02.

5. Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang J et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health 2015; 12: 57. doi: 10.1186/s12978-015-0043-6.

6. Betran AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ et al. WHO statement on caesarena section rates. BJOG 2016; 123 (5): 667–670. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528. 13526.

7. World Health Organisation. WHO recommendations on maternal and newborn care for a positive postnatal experience. 2022 [online]. Available from: https: //www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240045989.

8. Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic. Forecast of the development of the Slovak population until 2025. 2025 [online]. Available from: http: //portal.statistics.sk/showdoc.do?docid=10331.

9. Kjerulff KH, Paul IM, Weisman CS et al. Association between mode of first delivery and subsequent fecundity and fertility. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3 (4): e203076. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3076.

10. Kjerulff KH, Zhu J, Weisman CS et al. First birth caesarean section and subsequent fertility: a population-based study in the USA, 2000–2008. Hum Reprod 2013; 28 (12): 3349–3357. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det343.

11. Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L et al. Short- -term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet 2018; 392 (10155): 1349–1357. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736 (18) 31930-5.

12. Gao Y, Xue Q, Chen G et al. An analysis of the indications for cesarean section in a teaching hospital in China. In Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013; 170 (2): 414–418. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.08.009.

13. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB et al. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990–2014. PLoS One 2017; 11 (2): e0148343. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148343.

14. Antoine C, Young BK. Cesarean section one hundred years 1920-–2020: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. J Perinat Med 2020; 49 (1): 5–16. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2020-0305.

15. Zeitlin J, Durox M, Macfarlane A et al. Classification system for comparing caesarean section rates in Europe: an analysis of routine data from the Euro-Peristat study. BJOG 2021; 128 (9): 1444–1453. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16634.

16. NCZI. 1996–2021. Data of the National Medical Center Information of the Slovak Republic. 2021 [online]. Available from: https: //www.nczisk.sk/Aktuality/Pages/Starostlivost-o-rodicku-a-novorodenca-v-Slovenskej-republike-2021.aspx.

17. Martincek V, Bielik T, Rak A et al. Možnosti zníženia počtu cisárskych rezov zavedením Robsonovej klasifikácie. Slov Gynek Pôrod 2021; 28 (4): 176–180.

18. Zahumensky J, Psenkova P, Nemethova B et al. Evaluation of cesarean delivery rates at three university hospital labor units using the Robson classification system. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2019; 146 (1): 118–125. doi: 10.1002/ ijgo.12842.

19. Zahumensky J, Psenkova P, Dolezal P et al. Impact of implementing a multifaceted intervention to reduce rates of cesarean section: a quality-improvement study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2020; 151 (2): 244–248. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13345.

20. Záhumenský J, Pšenková P, Sládkovičová J et al. Predčasný odtok plodovej vody v termíne a jeho postavenie v Robsonovej klasifikácií rodičiek. Actual Gyn 2019; 11: 45– 50.

Submitted/ Doručené: 30. 10. 2024

Accepted/ Prijaté: 19. 11. 2024

Tomáš Debnár, MD

Gyncare s.r.o.

Novozámocká 67

949 05 Nitra

Slovak Republic

tomas.debnar@gyncare.sk