Periodo intergenésico: Revisión de la literature

10Citations
Citations of this article
227Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Interpregnancy interval is a topic of importance when planning new pregnancies after previous vaginal delivery, cesarean section or abortion. There is currently a lack of consensus in terms of definitions and the clinical importance of interpregnancy interval length, which is the reason to perform a literature review to clarify concepts. METHODS: Published papers from 1999 to 2017 from PubMed/MEDLINE were searched with the purpose of identifying those related to interpregnancy interval. Review articles, original papers, and clinical guidelines in relation to short and long interpregnancy interval were considered. RESULTS: Interpregnancy interval is defined as the period between the last obstetric event and the beginning of the next pregnancy (last menstrual period). Recommended time to initiate the next pregnancy must be at least 18 months (short interpregnancy interval, SII) and no more than 60 months (long interpregnancy interval, LII) to reduce the risk of adverse maternal, perinatal and neonatal outcomes. It is important to emphasize that even though uterine scar dehiscence is a serious complication of SII less than 6 months after a cesarean section, it is not the only complication. It is important to consider LII during obstetric evaluation, due to its association with preeclampsia. CONCLUSION: It is clinically relevant to know the correct definitions of SII and LII to avoid their complications. There is also a need for clinical trials about interpregnancy interval within our population in order to better understand the consequences of SII and LII, thus taking the necessary measures to improve maternal and fetal outcomes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zavala-García, A., Ortiz-Reyes, H., Salomon-Kuri, J., Padilla-Amigo, C., & Ruiz, R. P. (2018). Periodo intergenésico: Revisión de la literature. Revista Chilena de Obstetricia y Ginecologia, 83(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-75262018000100052

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free