广州医科大学学报
廣州醫科大學學報
엄주의과대학학보
Academic Journal of Guangzhou Medical College
2015年
3期
79-82
,共4页
剖宫产瘢痕妊娠%阴式手术%腹腔镜手术%甲氨喋呤
剖宮產瘢痕妊娠%陰式手術%腹腔鏡手術%甲氨喋呤
부궁산반흔임신%음식수술%복강경수술%갑안첩령
cesarean scar pregnancy%transvaginal surgery%laparoscopy%methotrexate
目的：比较经阴道剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术与腹腔镜剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术在治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠中的临床疗效。方法：回顾性分析本院2009年01月至2014年10月收治的53例剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的患者，根据手术方式不同分为经阴道剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术组及腹腔镜剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术组，比较两种手术方式下的手术时间、术中失血量、术后住院时间、血β-HCG 降至正常的时间、月经恢复正常时间及住院费用。结果：53例患者手术顺利进行，无中转开腹，未出现严重手术并发症。两种手术方式的术中出血量、术后血β-HCG 降至正常时间及术后月经恢复正常时间无统计学差异（P﹤0.05），经阴道手术组手术时间及术后住院天数均短于腹腔镜手术组，住院费用明显少于腹腔镜手术组（ P﹤0.05）。结论：经阴道剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术及腹腔镜剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术均有较好的临床疗效，经阴道剖宫产瘢痕妊娠病灶清除术适合于基层医院推广应用。
目的：比較經陰道剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術與腹腔鏡剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術在治療剖宮產瘢痕妊娠中的臨床療效。方法：迴顧性分析本院2009年01月至2014年10月收治的53例剖宮產瘢痕妊娠的患者，根據手術方式不同分為經陰道剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術組及腹腔鏡剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術組，比較兩種手術方式下的手術時間、術中失血量、術後住院時間、血β-HCG 降至正常的時間、月經恢複正常時間及住院費用。結果：53例患者手術順利進行，無中轉開腹，未齣現嚴重手術併髮癥。兩種手術方式的術中齣血量、術後血β-HCG 降至正常時間及術後月經恢複正常時間無統計學差異（P﹤0.05），經陰道手術組手術時間及術後住院天數均短于腹腔鏡手術組，住院費用明顯少于腹腔鏡手術組（ P﹤0.05）。結論：經陰道剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術及腹腔鏡剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術均有較好的臨床療效，經陰道剖宮產瘢痕妊娠病竈清除術適閤于基層醫院推廣應用。
목적：비교경음도부궁산반흔임신병조청제술여복강경부궁산반흔임신병조청제술재치료부궁산반흔임신중적림상료효。방법：회고성분석본원2009년01월지2014년10월수치적53례부궁산반흔임신적환자，근거수술방식불동분위경음도부궁산반흔임신병조청제술조급복강경부궁산반흔임신병조청제술조，비교량충수술방식하적수술시간、술중실혈량、술후주원시간、혈β-HCG 강지정상적시간、월경회복정상시간급주원비용。결과：53례환자수술순리진행，무중전개복，미출현엄중수술병발증。량충수술방식적술중출혈량、술후혈β-HCG 강지정상시간급술후월경회복정상시간무통계학차이（P﹤0.05），경음도수술조수술시간급술후주원천수균단우복강경수술조，주원비용명현소우복강경수술조（ P﹤0.05）。결론：경음도부궁산반흔임신병조청제술급복강경부궁산반흔임신병조청제술균유교호적림상료효，경음도부궁산반흔임신병조청제술괄합우기층의원추엄응용。
Objective:To compare the clinical effect of transvaginal cesarean scar pregnancy( CSP ) debridement versus laparoscopic CSP debridement in treating CSP. Methods: Fifty-three CSP patients hospitalized in our hospital between January 2009 and October 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were divided into the transvaginal CSP debridement group and the laparoscopic CSP debridement group according to different surgical approaches. The operative time,intraoperative blood loss volume,postoperative hospital stay, time of serum β-HCG decreased to normal value,menstruation recovery time and hospitalization expenses were compared between the two surgical approaches. Results:All 53 patients successfully underwent the operations, without conversion to laparotomy or severe surgical complications. There were no statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss volume,postoperative time of serum β-HCG decreased to normal value,and menstruation recovery time between the two groups(P﹤0.05). Shorter operative time and postoperative hospital stay,and significantly less hospitalization expenses were found in the transvaginal CSP debridement group than the laparoscopic CSP debridement group( P ﹤ 0. 05). Conclusion:Both of transvaginal CSP debridement and laparoscopic CSP debridement show good clinical effects,whereas ransvaginal CSP debridement justifies widespread use in primary-level hospitals.
