论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较盆底重建术与阴式子宫切除及阴道前后壁修补术在治疗重度盆腔脏器脱垂的手术疗效。方法:新疆巴州人民医院2010年3月~2011年5月在63例分期子宫脱垂Ⅲ~Ⅳ度伴不同程度阴道壁脱垂的患者,随机分为盆底重建术组(重建组)25例,阴式子宫切除及阴道前后壁修补术组(阴宫组)28例,比较2组术中出血量、手术时间、术后住院日等围手术期指标,术后复诊以POP2Q分度疗效评价指标。结果:重建组术中出血量及手术时间低于阴宫组(P>0.05),重建组术后住院日少于阴宫组(P<0.05),术后3个月及6个月治愈率2组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),1年后2组比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:盆底重建术治疗重度盆腔脏器脱垂,可保留子宫,能够恢复和增强盆底支持结构及功能,术后近期疗效肯定,生活质量明显改善,中远期疗效需继续随访。
Objective: To compare the surgical outcomes of pelvic floor reconstruction with vaginal hysterectomy and vaginal anterior and posterior wall repair in the treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse. Methods: Bazhou People’s Hospital of Xinjiang from March 2010 to May 2011 in 63 patients with stage Ⅲ ~ Ⅳ degrees of uterine prolapse with varying degrees of vaginal wall prolapse were randomly divided into pelvic floor reconstruction group (reconstruction group) 25 Cases, vaginal hysterectomy and vaginal anterior and posterior wall repair group (Yin group) 28 cases, the amount of bleeding during surgery, operative time, postoperative hospitalization and other perioperative indicators, postoperative referral to POP2Q indexing effect Evaluation index. Results: The intraoperative bleeding volume and operation time in reconstruction group were lower than that in Yin group (P> 0.05). The hospitalization days in reconstruction group were less than that in Yin group (P <0.05). The cure rates at 3 and 6 months after operation There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). After 1 year, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusions: Pelvic floor reconstruction can treat the severe pelvic organ prolapse and retain the uterus. It can restore and enhance the pelvic floor support structure and function. The short-term curative effect is sure, the quality of life is improved obviously, and the long-term curative effect needs to be followed up.