Uterine-sparing surgical procedures to control postpartum hemorrhage

Postpartum hemorrhage remains one of the principal causes of maternal mortality in the United States and throughout the world. Its management, which must be multidisciplinary (obstetrics, midwifery, anesthesiology, interventional radiology, and nursing), depends on the speed of both diagnosis and implementation of medical and surgical treatment to control the hemorrhage. The aim of this work is to describe the various techniques of vessel ligation and of uterine compression for controlling and treating severe hemorrhage, and to present the advantages and disadvantages of each. It is not difficult to perform vessel ligation of the uterine arteries: O'Leary's bilateral ligation of the uterine artery, Tsirulnikov's triple ligation, and AbdRabbo's stepwise uterine devascularization (that is, stepwise triple ligation). These procedures are associated with a high success rate (approximately 90%) and a low complication rate. Bilateral ligation of the internal iliac (hypogastric) arteries is more difficult to perform and potentially less effective (approximately 70% effectiveness) than the previously mentioned procedures. Its complication rate is low, but the complications are most often serious. There is no evidence that future fertility or subsequent obstetrical outcomes are impaired by ligation of either the uterine or internal iliac arteries. There are many techniques used for uterine compression sutures, and none has shown clear superiority to another. Uterine compression suture has an effectiveness rate of approximately 75% after failure of medical treatment and approximately 80% as a second-line procedure after unsuccessful vessel ligation. The risk of synechiae after uterine compression suture has not yet been adequately evaluated, but is probably around 5%. The risk of synechiae after uterine compression suture has not yet been adequately evaluated, but probably ranges between 5% and 10%. The methodologic quality of the studies assessing uterine-sparing surgical procedures remains limited, with no comparative studies. Accordingly, no evidence suggests that any one of these methods is better than any other. Accordingly, the choice of surgical technique to control hemorrhage must be guided firstly by the operator's experience. If the hemorrhage continues after a first-line uterine-sparing surgical procedure and the patient remains hemodynamically stable, a second-line procedure can be chosen. Nonetheless, the application of these procedures must not delay the performance of a peripartum hysterectomy in cases of hemodynamic instability.