论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨腹腔镜手术和传统开腹手术治疗宫外孕的临床效果。方法:选择本院2015年8月至2016年4月收治的确诊为宫外孕患者作为研究对象,共20例,对照组采用传统开腹手术进行治疗,观察组采用腹腔镜手术进行治疗,比较两组患者术中出血量、住院时间、肛门排气时间、并发症发生情况等。结果:观察组平均手术时间、平均术中出血量、平均住院时间和肛门排气时间分别为(103.5±12.5)min、(86.9±13.5)m L、(86.9±13.5)d、(4.9±1.9)h;对照组平均手术时间、平均术中出血量、平均住院时间和肛门排气时间分别为(138.8±13.5)min、(129.9±16.0)m L、(28.5±6.0)d、(9.5±2.0)h,组间比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组肠粘连和切口感染发生率分别为10%和10%;对照组肠粘连和切口感染发生率分别为50%和60%,组间比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:与传统开腹手术对比,腹腔镜手术在宫外孕治疗中具有更加明显的治疗效果,同时还具有明显的安全性。
Objective: To investigate the clinical effect of laparoscopic surgery and traditional laparotomy for ectopic pregnancy. Methods: A total of 20 patients with ectopic pregnancy who were admitted to our hospital from August 2015 to April 2016 were selected. The control group was treated by conventional laparotomy. The observation group was treated by laparoscopic surgery. The two groups were compared Patients with intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, anal exhaust time, complications and so on. Results: The average operation time, average blood loss, average length of hospital stay and anal exhaust time in the observation group were (103.5 ± 12.5) min, (86.9 ± 13.5) m, (86.9 ± 13.5) d, (4.9 ± 1.9) ) h. The average operation time, average blood loss, average length of hospital stay and anal exhaust time in the control group were (138.8 ± 13.5) min, (129.9 ± 16.0) m L, (28.5 ± 6.0) d and 2.0) h, the difference between groups was statistically significant (P <0.05). The rates of intestinal adhesion and incision infection in the observation group were 10% and 10%, respectively. The incidence of intestinal adhesion and incision infection in the control group was 50% and 60% respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05). Conclusion: Compared with the traditional laparotomy, laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of ectopic pregnancy has a more obvious therapeutic effect, but also has obvious safety.