[1]曾克非,夏婷婷.腹腔镜下子宫动脉结扎术与子宫动脉栓塞术在剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠中的治疗效果比较[J].医学信息,2023,36(09):147-150.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.09.031]
　ZENG Ke-fei,XIA Ting-ting.Comparison of the Therapeutic Effects of Laparoscopic Uterine Artery Ligation and Uterine Artery Embolization in Uterine Scar Pregnancy After Cesarean Section[J].Journal of Medical Information,2023,36(09):147-150.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.09.031]
点击复制

腹腔镜下子宫动脉结扎术与子宫动脉栓塞术在剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠中的治疗效果比较()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
36卷
期数:
2023年09期
页码:
147-150
栏目:
论著
出版日期:
2023-05-01

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of the Therapeutic Effects of Laparoscopic Uterine Artery Ligation and Uterine Artery Embolization in Uterine Scar Pregnancy After Cesarean Section
文章编号:
1006-1959（2023）09-0147-04
作者:
曾克非; 夏婷婷
（井冈山大学附属医院妇产科1，生殖医学科2，江西 井冈山 343000）
Author(s):
ZENG Ke-fei; XIA Ting-ting
(Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics1,Department of Reproductive Medicine2,Jinggangshan University Affiliated Hospital,Jinggangsha 343000,Jiangxi,China)
关键词:
腹腔镜下子宫动脉结扎术; 子宫动脉栓塞术; 子宫瘢痕妊娠
Keywords:
Laparoscopic uterine artery ligation; Uterine artery embolization; Uterine scar pregnancy
分类号:
R714.22
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2023.09.031
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 比较腹腔镜下子宫动脉结扎术与子宫动脉栓塞术在剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠（CSP）中的治疗效果。方法 选取2022年1月-6月我院妇科收治的58例CSP患者为研究对象，采用随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组，每组29例。对照组采用子宫动脉栓塞术治疗，观察组采用腹腔镜下子宫动脉结扎术，两组术后均进行瘢痕病灶切除修补术。比较两组治疗效果、手术指标、术后卵巢功能指标以及治疗安全性。结果 观察组治疗总有效率为93.10%，高于对照组的82.76%（P＜0.05）；观察组手术时间、术中出血量、术后血β-hCG恢复正常时间、住院时间、住院费用、月经复潮时间均小于对照组（P＜0.05）；两组24 h血β-hCG下降百分率比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；两组术后FSH、LH均高于术前，T、E2、AMH、窦卵泡数均低于术前，但观察组FSH、LH低于对照组，T、E2、AMH、窦卵泡数高于对照组（P＜0.05）；观察组术后并发症发生率为6.90%，低于对照组的17.24%（P＜0.05）。结论 与子宫动脉栓塞术比较，腹腔镜下子宫动脉结扎术治疗CSP可提高治疗总有效率，减少术中出血量，缩短手术、住院以及血β-hCG恢复正常时间，降低住院费用、并发症发生率，且对卵巢功能损伤更小，有利于卵巢功能保护，值得临床应用。
Abstract:
Objective To compare the therapeutic effects of laparoscopic uterine artery ligation and uterine artery embolization in cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).Methods From January to June 2022, 58 patients with CSP admitted to gynecology department of our hospital were selected as the research objects. They were divided into control group and observation group by random number table method, with 29 cases in each group. The control group was treated with uterine artery embolization, and the observation group was treated with laparoscopic uterine artery ligation. Both groups underwent scar resection and repair. The therapeutic effect, surgical indicators, postoperative ovarian function indicators and treatment safety were compared between the two groups.Results The total effective rate of treatment in the observation group was 93.10%, which was higher than 82.76% in the control group (P<0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood β-hCG recovery time, hospitalization time, hospitalization expenses and menstrual recovery time in the observation group were less than those in the control group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the percentage of 24 h blood β-hCG decline between the two groups (P>0.05). The levels of FSH and LH in the two groups were higher than those before operation, and the levels of T, E2, AMH and antral follicle count were lower than those before operation, but the levels of FSH and LH in the observation group were lower than those in the control group, and the levels of T, E2, AMH and antral follicle count were higher than those in the control group (P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the observation group was 6.90%, which was lower than 17.24% in the control group (P<0.05).Conclusion Compared with uterine artery embolization, laparoscopic uterine artery ligation for CSP can improve the total effective rate of treatment, reduce the amount of intraoperative blood loss, shorten the time of operation, hospitalization and blood β-hCG recovery, reduce the cost of hospitalization and the incidence of complications, and have less damage to ovarian function, which is conducive to the protection of ovarian function and is worthy of clinical application.

参考文献/References:

[1]杜秀梅.两种方式治疗剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠的临床效果[J].温州医科大学学报,2019,49(11):850-852,856.[2]黄燕,熊希,李素芬.子宫动脉栓塞术联合腹腔镜下切开取胚术治疗外生型剖宫产瘢痕妊娠效果观察[J].山东医药,2019,59(20):56-58.[3]郁胜胜,汤文娟.宫腹腔镜联合子宫动脉栓塞治疗复杂性子宫瘢痕妊娠42例临床分析[J].山西医药杂志,2018,47(11):1313-1315.[4]王晓樱,李妍.经阴道及腹腔镜治疗Ⅲ型剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的临床分析[J].中国现代手术学杂志,2019,23(6):449-453.[5]李英,张坤,韩劲松,等.腹腔镜双侧子宫动脉阻断联合宫腔镜妊娠病灶清除治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠[J].中国微创外科杂志,2017,17(3):216-219.[6]中华医学会妇产科学分会计划生育学组.剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠诊治专家共识(2016)[J].中华妇产科杂志,2016,51(8):568-572.[7]孟宁,何林生,尹春华.腹腔镜子宫动脉暂时阻断术与子宫动脉栓塞术预处理治疗Ⅲ型剖宫产瘢痕部位妊娠的效果分析[J].实用妇产科杂志,2019,35(6):475-477.[8]Jachymski T,Moczulska H,Guzowski G,et al.Conservative treatment of abnormally located intrauterine pregnancies (cervical and cesarean scar pregnancies): a mul- ticenter analysis (Polish series)[J].The Journal of Maternal- Fetal & Neonatal Medicine,2020,33(6):993-998.[9]邢慧敏,梁军,杨蕾,等.子宫动脉阻断术与子宫动脉栓塞术在剖宫产瘢痕妊娠手术治疗中的应用研究[J].解放军医药杂志,2016,28(12):99-101,105.[10]申慧慧,张慧弘.甲氨蝶呤、宫腔镜电切术、球囊压迫综合治疗剖宫产疤痕妊娠效果评价[J].华夏医学,2017,30(6):95-97.[11]王峰冰.介入联合宫腔镜治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的临床研究[J].河南医学研究,2016,25(8):1490-1491.[12]丁文清,袁迎九,梁政巧.经阴道子宫瘢痕妊娠病灶切除术治疗剖宫产术后瘢痕妊娠的疗效及对术后生活质量的影响[J].中国妇幼保健,2017,32(15):3489-3493.[13]Vo TM,Van T,Nguyen L,et al.Management of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy among Vietnamese Women[J].Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther,2019,8(1):12-18.[14]郑惠冰,韦羽梅.不同手术方式治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的临床效果比较[J].广西医学,2018,40(21):2615-2617.[15]庞琴霞,柳洲,张蓉,等.腹腔镜下子宫动脉阻断联合病灶切除术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的临床价值[J].检验医学与临床,2019,16(18):2614-2616,2619.[16]朱小红.腹腔镜子宫动脉阻断术在子宫瘢痕妊娠手术中的应用[J].泰山医学院学报,2016,37(1):74-75.[17]Birch Petersen K,Hoffmann E,Rifbjerg Larsen C,et al.Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review of treatment studies[J].Fertil Steril,2016,105(4):958-967.[18]陈滢,王晶,童明.腹腔镜子宫动脉阻断术在子宫瘢痕妊娠手术中的应用[J].海南医学,2013,24(11):1599-1601.[19]蔡惠芬,刘佳,刘小艳,等.不同时期剖宫产瘢痕子宫人工流产患者的情况分析[J].中国计划生育和妇产科,2019,11(2):45-49.[20]孙增涛,张鱼,刘薇,等.刮宫术前行子宫动脉栓塞术治疗347例子宫瘢痕妊娠的临床价值研究[J].中华介入放射学电子杂志,2018,6(3):204-208.[21]程小丰,李荣,何辉.腹腔镜子宫动脉暂时阻断术对Ⅲ型剖宫产瘢痕部位妊娠患者术中出血量和卵巢功能的影响[J].临床与病理杂志,2021,28(4):48-50.

相似文献/References:

[1]杨凯悦,单 莉,何菊仙.剖宫产瘢痕妊娠治疗方式的选择[J].医学信息,2019,32(02):48.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.02.016]
　YANG Kai-yue,SAHN Li,HE Ju-xian.Selection of treatment methods for cesarean scar pregnancy[J].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(09):48.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.02.016]
[2]曹祖容.子宫动脉栓塞术联合宫腔镜治疗 子宫黏膜下大肌瘤的效果[J].医学信息,2019,32(18):84.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.18.026]
　CAO Zu-rong.Effect of Uterine Artery Embolization Combined with Hysteroscopy in the Treatment of Uterine Submucosal Myoma[J].Journal of Medical Information,2019,32(09):84.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2019.18.026]
[3]龙 潭,黄 笛,杨 锦,等.腹主动脉球囊阻断联合子宫动脉栓塞术与传统手术治疗凶险性前置胎盘的临床疗效分析[J].医学信息,2022,35(05):101.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.05.025]
　LONG Tan,HUANG Di,YANG Jin,et al.Clinical Efficacy of Abdominal Aortic Balloon Occlusion Combined with Uterine Artery Embolization and Traditional Surgery in the Treatment of Dangerous Placenta Previa[J].Journal of Medical Information,2022,35(09):101.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.05.025]
[4]赵香秋,王怀涛.垂体后叶素联合宫腔镜下清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的临床效果[J].医学信息,2022,35(06):150.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.06.038]
　ZHAO Xiang-qiu,WANG Huai-tao.Clinical Effect of Pituitrin Combined with Hysteroscopic Curettage in the Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy[J].Journal of Medical Information,2022,35(09):150.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.06.038]

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01