论文部分内容阅读
目的比较产前诊断中原位培养瓶和平皿盖玻片两种培养皿进行羊水原位培养的临床效果。方法 118例在我产前诊断中心行羊膜腔穿刺术的病人,孕周为孕16周～孕23周,每例病人分别用原位培养瓶和平皿盖玻片进行原位培养,观察两种方法培养羊水细胞成功率,传代率,生长速度,细胞克隆数。结果两种方法的培养成功率均为100%,原位培养瓶的传代数8例,平皿盖玻片培养的传代数11例标本,配对样本t检验分析差异无统计学意义。原位培养瓶培养的生长速度(6.31±0.97)天、细胞克隆数(8.41±1.40)个,平皿盖玻片培养的生长速度(8.31±2.14)天、细胞克隆数(7.92±1.16)个,两种方法比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论通过实验证实,原位培养瓶和平皿盖玻片在羊水原位培养中成功率相同,但是用原位培养瓶培养羊水细胞生长速度快,细胞克隆数多,且该方法操作简单,耗时少,优于平皿盖玻片法。
Objective To compare the clinical effect of prenatal diagnosis of in situ culture flasks and dish coverslips on in situ culture of amniotic fluid. Methods 118 cases of amniocentesis in our prenatal diagnosis center, gestational age of 16 weeks pregnant ~ 23 weeks pregnant, each patient with in situ culture flask and dish cover glass for in situ culture to observe the two Methods Amniotic fluid cell success rate, pass rate, growth rate, cell number. Results The success rates of the two methods were all 100%. The number of passage in situ culture flask was 8, and the passage number of 11 cases cultured in the plate glass coverslip was no significant difference. (6.31 ± 0.97) days, the number of cell clones (8.41 ± 1.40), the growth rate of dish coverslips (8.31 ± 2.14) days and the number of cell clones (7.92 ± 1.16) The two methods, the differences were statistically significant (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: The in situ culture flask and plate cover glass have the same success rates in in situ culture of amniotic fluid. However, the in vitro culture of amniotic fluid with in-situ culture flask has the advantages of fast growth and large number of cell clones, and the method is simple and time-consuming Less, better than the plate cover glass method.