论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较不同的治疗方案治疗妇产科宫颈糜烂的临床效果。方法:选择2015年1月-2016年1月,医院妇产科收治的宫颈糜烂患者198例,采用随机分组的方法分为三组,分别记为药物组、微波组、LEEP刀组,每组患者均为66例,各自采用相应方法进行治疗。治疗后,就三组患者的治疗效果进行对比。结果:药物组治疗总有效率为72.73%,微波组治疗总有效率为80.30%,LEEP刀组治疗总有效率为95.45%;其中LEEP刀组明显高于其它两组(P<0.05),微波组略高于药物组,但无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论:在妇产科宫颈糜烂的治疗中,药物组、微波组之间治疗效果较为接近,LEEP刀疗法则明显优于其它两种治疗方法。
Objective: To compare the clinical effects of different treatment regimens in the treatment of gynecological cervical erosion. Methods: From January 2015 to January 2016, 198 patients with cervical erosion treated by the hospital obstetrics and gynecology department were randomly divided into three groups, namely medicine group, microwave group and LEEP knife group, each group Patients were 66 cases, each using the appropriate method of treatment. After treatment, the treatment effect of three groups of patients were compared. Results: The total effective rate was 72.73% in the drug group, 80.30% in the microwave group, and 95.45% in the LEEP group. The LEEP group was significantly higher than the other two groups (P <0.05) Group slightly higher than the drug group, but no significant difference (P> 0.05). Conclusion: In the treatment of cervical erosion in obstetrics and gynecology, the treatment effect between the drug group and the microwave group is relatively close, LEEP knife treatment is obviously superior to the other two treatment methods.