论文部分内容阅读
目的比较甲氨蝶呤联合米非司酮两种不同用药方法治疗异位妊娠的临床效果和不良反应。方法选取100例异位妊娠保守治疗患者,将其随机分为两组。观察组50例,给予甲氨蝶呤1 mg/kg,单次肌肉注射,联合米非司酮25 mg/次,每隔12 h一次,连服3 d;对照组50例,采用经阴道超声引导下穿刺给药(一次性注射甲氨蝶呤40 mg),联合米非司酮25mg/次,每间隔12 h一次,连服3 d。比较两组的临床疗效以及不良反应情况。结果观察组成功率为94.0%,对照组成功率为88.0%,两组成功率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者血β-HCG于治疗后第4、7、10、14 d比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者治疗7 d和14 d包块直径均值差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组不良反应总发生率为24.0%,对照组不良反应总发生率为12.0%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论两种不同方案对异位妊娠患者临床疗效及不良反应无差异,但观察组采用的治疗方案更易开展,安全性高,值得推广。
Objective To compare the clinical effects and side effects of methotrexate and mifepristone in treating ectopic pregnancy. Methods 100 patients with conservative treatment of ectopic pregnancy were selected and randomly divided into two groups. 50 cases in the observation group were given methotrexate 1 mg / kg, a single intramuscular injection, combined with mifepristone 25 mg / time, once every 12 h, and even for 3 d; control group of 50 patients with transvaginal ultrasound Guided by puncture medication (a single injection of methotrexate 40 mg), combined with mifepristone 25mg / time, once every 12 h, and even for 3 d. The clinical efficacy and adverse reactions of the two groups were compared. Results The success rate of observation group was 94.0%, and that of control group was 88.0%. There was no significant difference in success rate between the two groups (P> 0.05). The blood β-HCG in two groups was compared on the 4th, 7th, There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the means of 7 and 14 days (P> 0.05). The total incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was 24.0% The total reaction rate was 12.0%, the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). Conclusion There are no differences in clinical efficacy and adverse reactions between the two different regimens in patients with ectopic pregnancy. However, the treatment regimen used in the observation group is easier to carry out, with higher safety and worthy of promotion.