腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤的疗效及对术后妊娠的影响
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Efficacy of laparoscopic myomectomy on uterine leiomyoma and its influence on postoperative pregnancy
  • 作者:张雯博
  • 英文作者:ZHANG Wen-bo;Department of Gynaecology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciencesb Shenzhen Hospital;
  • 关键词:腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术 ; 子宫肌瘤 ; 疗效 ; 术后妊娠
  • 英文关键词:Laparoscopic myomectomy;;Uterine leiomyoma;;Efficacy;;Postoperative pregnancy
  • 中文刊名:ZWYY
  • 英文刊名:Chinese Journal of Modern Drug Application
  • 机构:中国科学院大学深圳医院(光明)妇科;
  • 出版日期:2019-05-25
  • 出版单位:中国现代药物应用
  • 年:2019
  • 期:v.13
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:ZWYY201910005
  • 页数:3
  • CN:10
  • ISSN:11-5581/R
  • 分类号:14-16
摘要
目的探讨腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤的疗效及对术后妊娠的影响。方法 84例子宫肌瘤患者,按照手术方式的不同分成研究组和对照组,各42例。研究组采用腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术进行治疗,对照组采用传统开腹手术进行治疗。观察比较两组术中出血量、手术时间、肛门首次排气时间;比较两组术后肌瘤残余、复发及并发症发生情况;比较两组术后妊娠情况。结果研究组术中出血量(269.93±41.09)ml少于对照组的(318.31±21.47)ml,手术时间(79.93±11.08)min及肛门首次排气时间(13.04±2.18)h均显著短于对照组的(102.23±16.28)min、(21.31±3.47)h,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组术后肌瘤残余率和复发率分别为4.76%、14.29%,对照组术后肌瘤残余率和复发率分别为4.76%、11.90%,比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。研究组并发症发生率为4.76%,明显低于对照组的21.43%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。研究组妊娠率68.75%、足月妊娠率81.82%、流产率13.64%与对照组的76.92%、80.00%、15.00%比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤的疗效较好,且对患者术后妊娠能力的影响较小,值得在临床大力推广。
        Objective To discuss the efficacy of laparoscopic myomectomy on uterine leiomyoma and its influence on postoperative pregnancy. Methods A total of 84 uterine leiomyoma patients were divided by different surgical methods into research group and control group, with 42 cases in each group. The research group was treated with laparoscopic myomectomy, and the control group was treated with traditional open surgery. Observation and comparison were made on intraoperative bleeding volume, operation time, first time of anal exhaust, postoperative myoma residual, recurrence and complications, and postoperative pregnancy between the two groups. Results The research group had less intraoperative bleeding volume as(269.93±41.09) ml than(318.31±21.47) ml in the control group, and significantly shorter operation time as(79.93±11.08) min and first time of anal exhaust as(13.04±2.18) h than(102.23±16.28) min and(21.31±3.47) h in the control group. Their difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The research group had postoperative myoma residual, recurrence rate respectively as 4.76% and 14.29%, which were 4.76% and 11.90% in the control group, and their difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05). The research group had obviously lower incidence of complications as 4.76% than 21.43% in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). The research group had pregnancy rate as 68.75%, full-term pregnancy rate as 81.82%, and abortion rate as 13.64%, which were 76.92%, 80.00% and 15.00% in the control group. Their difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic myomectomy shows good efficacy in treating uterine leiomyoma, and it has little influence on postoperative pregnant ability. It is worthy of clinical promotion.
引文
[1]郭玉琳.腹腔镜下子宫肌瘤剔除术与传统开腹子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤疗效对比研究.陕西医学杂志, 2016, 45(7):824-826.
    [2]李娜.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术与经腹子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤效果比较.中国急救医学, 2016, 36(1):54-55.
    [3]孙小淳,李析蒨.经阴道子宫肌瘤剔除术及腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤的疗效比较.中国妇幼保健, 2017, 32(18):4570-4572.
    [4]徐莉,李丹,郭凤军,等.腹腔镜下子宫肌瘤剔除术与开腹手术的150例临床分析.中国妇幼保健, 2014, 29(18):3011-3013.
    [5]王丹丹,杨清.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术的相关问题及其处理.中国实用妇科与产科杂志, 2015, 31(5):399-402.
    [6]吴志军,李克红,许园姣.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤的临床疗效及其对患者术后妊娠的影响.临床医学工程,2018, 25(5):567-568.
    [7]陆宏,刘佳,王晓彬,等.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术与经腹子宫肌瘤剔除术对子宫肌瘤患者术后妊娠的影响.中国医药导报,2015(12):102-106.
    [8]丁金萍,将素玲,王金彩.腹腔镜下子宫肌瘤剔除术与开腹子宫肌瘤剔除术临床疗效及其对术后妊娠的影响.医药论坛杂志, 2017, 38(1):4-5.
    [9]罗萍.子宫肌瘤不同术式剔除术后临床疗效及其对妊娠的影响.中国医师杂志, 2016, 18(5):776-778.
    [10]陈晓丽.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗后肌瘤残留、复发及妊娠结局的临床分析.吉林医学, 2017, 38(12):2261-2262.
    [11]程松.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗子宫肌瘤对术后妊娠的影响.临床合理用药杂志, 2017, 10(20):136-137.
    [12]江莉.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤患者临床效果及术后并发症观察.中国妇幼保健, 2018, 33(19):216-218.
    [13]唐晓霞.腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗子宫肌瘤对术后妊娠结局的影响.中外女性健康研究, 2017(4):49.
    [14]田艺,张坤,苏青,等.腹腔镜下子宫肌瘤微创剔除术治疗子宫肌瘤临床疗效及对患者应激反应的影响研究.陕西医学杂志, 2018, 47(1):93-95.
    [15]罗彩霞.腹腔镜子宫肌瘤剔除术对子宫肌瘤患者术后妊娠的影响.中国继续医学教育, 2018, 10(28):112-114.