子宫颈上皮内瘤变患者子宫颈环形电切除术后妊娠结局与分娩方式临床分析
|
摘要
目的探讨子宫颈上皮内瘤变患者子宫颈环形电切除术后妊娠结局与分娩方式。方法方便选取该院门诊2015年1月—2017年1月收治的42例子宫颈上皮内瘤变患者,均进行子宫颈环形电切除术治疗,随访和电子病历记录患者的复查结果以及术后妊娠情况。结果该组患者妊娠距离手术时间为3～25个月,平均(10.88±5.38)个月,根据手术到怀孕的时间分组,≤1年者19例(61.29%),>1年者12例(38.71%),两组患者妊娠结局对比差异无统计学意义(χ~2=2.67,P>0.05);根据手术次数分组,一次者29例(93.55%),两次者2例(6.45%),两组患者妊娠结局对比差异无统计学意义(χ~2=1.99,P>0.05);根据切除深度分组,15～20 mm者25例(80.64%),21～25 mm者6例(19.35%),两组患者妊娠结局对比差异无统计学意义(χ~2=1.13,P>0.05);根据切除宽度分组,<25 mm者21例(67.74%),≥25 mm者10例(32.26%),两组患者妊娠结局对比差异无统计学意义(χ~2=0.82,P>0.05)。结论子宫颈环形电切除术对术后妊娠分娩虽然具有一定影响,但只要选择合理的切除范围,严格掌握手术适应证,术后3个月后均可以考虑妊娠。
Objective To investigate the pregnancy outcome and delivery mode after cervical ring electrosurgical resection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Methods 42 patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia who were admitted to our hospital from January 2015 to January 2017 were convenient selected and treated with cervical ring electrosurgery, followup and electronic medical records, and the postoperative pregnancy. Results The operation time of this group was 3 to 25 months, with an average of(10.88±5.38) months. According to the time from surgery to pregnancy, 19 cases(61.29%) were≤1 year, and 12 cases were >1 year(38.71%), the difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups was not significant, no statistically significant(χ~2=2.67, P >0.05); according to the number of operations, 29 cases(93.55%), 2 cases(6.45%), there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups(χ~2=1.99, P>0.05). According to the depth of resection, 25 cases(80.64%) of 15-20 mm, 6 cases(19.35%) of 21-25 mm, there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups(χ~2=1.13, P>0.05). According to the resection width, 21 cases(67.74%) of <25 mm, 10 cases(32.26%) of ≥25 mm, there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups(χ~2=0.82, P>0.05). Conclusion Cervical ring electrosurgical resection has certain influence on postoperative pregnancy and delivery, but as long as the reasonable resection range is selected and the surgical indications are strictly controlled, pregnancy can be considered after 3 months.
Objective To investigate the pregnancy outcome and delivery mode after cervical ring electrosurgical resection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Methods 42 patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia who were admitted to our hospital from January 2015 to January 2017 were convenient selected and treated with cervical ring electrosurgery, followup and electronic medical records, and the postoperative pregnancy. Results The operation time of this group was 3 to 25 months, with an average of(10.88±5.38) months. According to the time from surgery to pregnancy, 19 cases(61.29%) were≤1 year, and 12 cases were >1 year(38.71%), the difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups was not significant, no statistically significant(χ~2=2.67, P >0.05); according to the number of operations, 29 cases(93.55%), 2 cases(6.45%), there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups(χ~2=1.99, P>0.05). According to the depth of resection, 25 cases(80.64%) of 15-20 mm, 6 cases(19.35%) of 21-25 mm, there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups(χ~2=1.13, P>0.05). According to the resection width, 21 cases(67.74%) of <25 mm, 10 cases(32.26%) of ≥25 mm, there was no significant difference in pregnancy outcome between the two groups(χ~2=0.82, P>0.05). Conclusion Cervical ring electrosurgical resection has certain influence on postoperative pregnancy and delivery, but as long as the reasonable resection range is selected and the surgical indications are strictly controlled, pregnancy can be considered after 3 months.
引文
[1]汤建利,闵丽萍.宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ级患者采用宫颈冷刀锥切术治疗疗效观察[J].浙江创伤外科,2016,21(2):353-354.
[2]黄友美.子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切治疗子宫颈上皮内瘤变的疗效比较[J].中外女性健康研究,2018(14):182,186.
[3]程其会.宫颈冷刀锥切术和LEEP刀锥切术治疗高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变的疗效分析[J].中国社区医师,2018,34(14):22-23.
[4]林俐.子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切治疗子宫颈上皮内瘤变的疗效对比[J].基层医学论坛,2018,22(8):1086-1087.
[5]杨亚妮,刘祥芳.子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切术治疗子宫颈上皮内瘤变的对比分析[J].临床医学研究与实践,2018,3(6):78-79.
[6]蔡丽霞.宫颈环形电切术治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变效果观察[J].河南外科学杂志,2018,24(1):152-153.
[7]李焕香.宫颈环形电切术与宫颈冷刀锥切术治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变患者的近期疗效比较及术后复发相关因素分析[J].中国妇幼保健,2017,32(18):4578-4580.
[8]刘兆董,孙蓬明,高金华.子宫颈环形电切术诊治子宫颈上皮内瘤变132例[J].福建医药杂志,2017,39(4):140-143.
[9]张文静.子宫颈上皮内瘤变经子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切疗效对比[J].现代诊断与治疗,2017,28(9):1691-1692.
[10]郝春雪.宫颈环形电切术治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变119例[J].实用医药杂志,2016,33(10):898-899.
[11]徐媛媛.用宫颈环形电切术对92例宫颈上皮内瘤变患者进行治疗的效果研究[J].当代医药论丛,2016,14(18):62-63.
[12]张晶,潘育翔,马瑞肖,等.子宫颈上皮内瘤变患者子宫颈环形电切除术后妊娠结局及分娩方式的临床分析[J].中国医科大学学报,2018,47(9):812-815.
[2]黄友美.子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切治疗子宫颈上皮内瘤变的疗效比较[J].中外女性健康研究,2018(14):182,186.
[3]程其会.宫颈冷刀锥切术和LEEP刀锥切术治疗高级别宫颈上皮内瘤变的疗效分析[J].中国社区医师,2018,34(14):22-23.
[4]林俐.子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切治疗子宫颈上皮内瘤变的疗效对比[J].基层医学论坛,2018,22(8):1086-1087.
[5]杨亚妮,刘祥芳.子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切术治疗子宫颈上皮内瘤变的对比分析[J].临床医学研究与实践,2018,3(6):78-79.
[6]蔡丽霞.宫颈环形电切术治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变效果观察[J].河南外科学杂志,2018,24(1):152-153.
[7]李焕香.宫颈环形电切术与宫颈冷刀锥切术治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变患者的近期疗效比较及术后复发相关因素分析[J].中国妇幼保健,2017,32(18):4578-4580.
[8]刘兆董,孙蓬明,高金华.子宫颈环形电切术诊治子宫颈上皮内瘤变132例[J].福建医药杂志,2017,39(4):140-143.
[9]张文静.子宫颈上皮内瘤变经子宫颈环形电切术与冷刀锥切疗效对比[J].现代诊断与治疗,2017,28(9):1691-1692.
[10]郝春雪.宫颈环形电切术治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变119例[J].实用医药杂志,2016,33(10):898-899.
[11]徐媛媛.用宫颈环形电切术对92例宫颈上皮内瘤变患者进行治疗的效果研究[J].当代医药论丛,2016,14(18):62-63.
[12]张晶,潘育翔,马瑞肖,等.子宫颈上皮内瘤变患者子宫颈环形电切除术后妊娠结局及分娩方式的临床分析[J].中国医科大学学报,2018,47(9):812-815.