【摘要】 目的探讨不同手术方式治疗子宫切口憩室的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2014年8月—2017年8月于我科进行手术治疗的30例子宫切口憩室患者,根据手术方式的不同,分为观察组(宫腹腔镜联合下子宫切口憩室切除加子宫修补术);对照组(阴式子宫切口憩室切除加子宫修补术);每组15例患者,比较两组临床资料,手术指标(术中出血量、术后胃肠功能恢复时间、术后住院天数)以及随访指标(经期恢复情况及再孕率)。结果两组临床资料差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),观察组手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院天数均少于对照组(P<0.05),两组术后月经时间及再妊娠率差异无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。结论宫腹腔镜联合下子宫切口憩室切除加子宫修补术手术时间短、术中出血少、给患者带来的创伤小,术后患者恢复快、住院时间短。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the clinical effects of different surgical methods in the treatment of previous cesarean scar defect. Methods Retrospective analysis was performed on 30 cases of patients with previous cesarean scar defect, who underwent operation in our department from August 2014 to August 2017. According to different surgical methods, the patients were divided into observation groups(previous cesarean scar defect resection and hysterorrhaphy by hysteroscope combined with laparoscope surgery); Control group(previous cesarean scar defect resection and hysterorrhaphy by vaginal surgery); 15 patients in each group were compared with clinical data, operation indicator(intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery time of gastrointestinal function, postoperative hospitalization days) and follow-up indicator(menstrual time and repregnancy rate). Results There was no significant difference in clinical data between the two groups(P > 0.05). The operative time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospitalization days in the observation group were less than those in the control group(P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative menstrual time and repregnancy rate between the two groups(P > 0.05). Conclusion Previous cesarean scar defect resection and hysterorrhaphy through hysteroscope combined with laparoscope surgery has less operative time, intraoperative blood loss, trauma, postoperative hospitalization days and faster postoperative recovery for patients.更多还原