论文部分内容阅读
目的比较开腹手术与腹腔镜手术治疗异位妊娠患者的临床疗效。方法收集2012—2013年徐州矿务集团第二医院异位妊娠患者160例,按照手术类型不同分为开腹组与腔镜组,各80例。开腹组患者行开腹手术,腔镜组患者行腹腔镜手术。观察两组患者切口长度、手术时间、术中出血量、排气时间与住院时间,随访24个月妊娠结局(试管授精、促排卵、不孕与自然妊娠)与妊娠位置(输卵管壶腹部妊娠、伞部、峡部与宫内妊娠)。结果腔镜组患者切口长度短于开腹组,术中出血量少于开腹组,排气时间与住院时间短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组患者手术时间比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者术后随访妊娠结局比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者妊娠位置比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论较传统开腹手术,腹腔镜手术术中创伤小,恢复快,术后宫内妊娠发生率更高。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of laparotomy and laparoscopy in the treatment of ectopic pregnancy. Methods 160 cases of ectopic pregnancy in the Second Hospital of Xuzhou Mining Group from 2012 to 2013 were collected and divided into open group and endoscopic group according to the type of operation. Patients in the open group underwent laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery in patients in the laparoscopic group. The incision length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, exhaust time and hospital stay were observed. The outcome of 24 months follow-up (IVF, ovulation, infertility and natural pregnancy) and pregnancy location (tubal ampullary pregnancy, Umbrella department, isthmus and intrauterine pregnancy). Results The length of incision in laparoscopic group was shorter than that in laparotomy group. The blood loss in operation was less than that in laparotomy group. The time of extubation and hospitalization were shorter than that in control group (P <0.05). The operative time The difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the follow-up of pregnancy outcome (P> 0.05). The two groups of patients with gestational location, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion Compared with traditional laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery, trauma and recovery are quick, and the incidence of intrauterine pregnancy after operation is higher.