论文部分内容阅读
目的:探究西医不同治疗方法治疗宫颈糜烂的临床疗效。方法:选取我院2012年3月-2013年5月在我院接受手术治疗的宫颈糜烂患者46例。随机分为对照组23例及实验组23例。对照组采用微波治疗,实验组采用Leep刀治疗宫颈糜烂。观察对比两组患者治疗效果。结果:对照组23例患者微波治疗后总有效率为43.5%,实验组行Leep刀环切术治疗的23例患者,治疗后总有效率为82.5%。实验组治疗后发生阴道流血流液等不良反应较对照组少。结论:对于宫颈糜烂的患者临床上行Leep刀环切术治疗较微波治疗效果更明显。建议临床推广使用。
Objective: To explore the clinical effects of different treatment methods of Western medicine for cervical erosion. Methods: Forty-six patients with cervical erosion undergoing surgery in our hospital from March 2012 to May 2013 were selected. Randomly divided into control group of 23 cases and experimental group of 23 cases. The control group was treated with microwave, and the experimental group was treated with Leep knife for cervical erosion. Observed and compared the treatment effect of two groups of patients. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients in the control group had a total effective rate of 43.5% after microwave treatment. Twenty-three patients in the experimental group underwent Leep knife-ring operation, and the total effective rate was 82.5% after the treatment. Experimental group after treatment of vaginal bleeding and other adverse reactions than the control group. Conclusion: For patients with cervical erosion clinically advanced Leep knife ring surgery is more effective than microwave treatment. Recommended for clinical use.