论文部分内容阅读
目的应用超声技术评价腹腔镜及开腹两种不同术式保守治疗输卵管妊娠后的疗效。方法选择我院2012年1月至2013年6月间手术治疗的输卵管妊娠患者未破裂型134例,其中要求保留输卵管的患者115例,腹腔镜手术者62例(腹腔镜组);开腹保守手术53例(开腹组)。对两组患者术后行常规超声检查及超声子宫输卵管造影检查,对两组间输卵管通畅情况、输卵管全程显影时间进行比较分析。结果患侧输卵管通畅率腹腔镜组明显高于开腹组(P<0.05),患侧输卵管通而不畅及不通率开腹组高于腹腔镜组(P<0.05),患侧输卵管全程显影时间腹腔镜组明显低于开腹组(P<0.05)。结论与开腹保守手术治疗未破裂型输卵管妊娠比较,腹腔镜保守手术具有输卵管通畅率高、通而不畅及不通率低的优点,因此腹腔镜保守手术对输卵管的损伤小,术后输卵管通畅程度好;对于有生育要求的输卵管妊娠患者来说,选择腹腔镜治疗效果更好。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopy and laparotomy for conservative treatment of tubal pregnancy by ultrasound. Methods A total of 134 patients with unruptured tubal pregnancy undergoing surgical treatment from January 2012 to June 2013 in our hospital were selected. Among them, 115 were required for tubal retention and 62 for laparoscopic surgery (laparoscopic group) 53 cases of surgery (open group). Two groups of patients underwent routine ultrasound examination and ultrasound hysterosalpingography, tubal patency between the two groups, tubal full development time for comparative analysis. Results The ipsilateral fallopian tube patency rate in laparoscopic group was significantly higher than that in open group (P <0.05), tubal pass and poor rate in laparotomy group were higher than those in laparoscopic group (P <0.05) Time laparoscopic group was significantly lower than the open group (P <0.05). Conclusions Laparoscopic conservative surgery has the advantages of high tubal patency rate, poor circulation and low non-viable rate compared with laparotomy conservative surgery for unruptured tubal pregnancy. Therefore, laparoscopic conservative surgery has less damage to fallopian tubes and tubal patency A good degree; for tubal pregnancy patients with fertility requirements, the choice of laparoscopic treatment better.