论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察比较急诊腹腔镜与传统开腹手术在治疗输卵管异位妊娠中的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析输卵管异位妊娠患者在行急诊腹腔镜手术与传统手术治疗的临床资料各75例患者,比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、术后输卵管通畅情况。结果:急诊腹腔镜组手术时间(40.43±2.45)min与传统开腹手术组手术时间(40.52±2.78)min比较,差异无统计学意义;急诊腹腔镜组术中出血量(16.23±2.27)ml与传统开腹手术组术中出血量(48.65±12.23)ml比较,差异有统计学意义;急诊腹腔镜组术后肛门排气时间(1.23±0.6)天与传统开腹手术组术后肛门排气时间(2.35±0.8)天比较,差异有统计学意义;急诊腹腔镜组术后输卵管通畅率(83.5±2.3)%与传统开腹手术组(52.7±3.9)%比较,差异有统计学意义。结论:腹腔镜手术治疗输卵管异位妊娠出血少、术后恢复快、输卵管通畅率高,疗效优于传统开腹手术,是治疗输卵管异位妊娠的首选治疗方案。
Objective: To observe and compare the clinical effect of emergency laparoscopy and traditional laparotomy in the treatment of tubal ectopic pregnancy. Methods: A retrospective analysis of tubal ectopic pregnancy in patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic surgery and traditional surgical treatment of 75 patients with clinical data, the two groups were compared operation time, blood loss, anal exhaust time, postoperative tubal Unobstructed situation. Results: There was no significant difference in operative time between the emergency laparoscopic group (40.43 ± 2.45) min and the traditional laparotomy group (40.52 ± 2.78) min; the bleeding volume in the emergency laparoscopic group was (16.23 ± 2.27) ml Compared with the conventional open surgery group, the bleeding volume in operation was (48.65 ± 12.23) ml, the difference was statistically significant. The time of anal exhaust in emergency laparoscopic group was 1.23 ± 0.6 days, (2.35 ± 0.8) days, the difference was statistically significant. The tubal patency rate in the emergency laparoscopic group (83.5 ± 2.3%) was significantly higher than that in the traditional laparotomy group (52.7 ± 3.9)%, the difference was statistically significant . Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery for tubal ectopic pregnancy less bleeding, rapid recovery, tubal patency rate, the effect is superior to the traditional open surgery, is the treatment of tubal ectopic pregnancy preferred treatment.