【摘要】：目的探討Prolift全盆懸吊術(shù)和經(jīng)陰道子宮切除+陰道前后壁修補(bǔ)術(shù)2種手術(shù)方式治療盆腔臟器脫垂的臨床效果差異。方法 90例盆腔臟器脫垂患者,采用Prolift全盆懸吊術(shù)治療30例為觀察組,60例采用經(jīng)陰道子宮切除+陰道前后壁修補(bǔ)術(shù)治療者為對(duì)照組。比較2組手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、術(shù)后保留導(dǎo)尿時(shí)間、住院時(shí)間、術(shù)后陰道長(zhǎng)度及療效。結(jié)果觀察組手術(shù)時(shí)間[(69.5±11.3)min]較對(duì)照組[(124.7±14.0)min]短,術(shù)中出血量[(58.7±18.0)mL]較對(duì)照組[(133.5±26.4)mL)]少,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);觀察組術(shù)后保留導(dǎo)尿時(shí)間[(5.3±1.2)d]、住院時(shí)間[(8.2±1.7)d]與對(duì)照組[(5.7±1.5)、(8.5±2.0)d]比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);術(shù)后觀察組陰道長(zhǎng)度[(6.39±0.45)cm]與術(shù)前[(6.42±0.47)cm]比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05),大于對(duì)照組術(shù)后[(5.86±0.55)cm](P0.05);隨訪12個(gè)月,觀察組治愈率(93.33%)高于對(duì)照組(73.33%),差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05);觀察組術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率(10.0%)與對(duì)照組(15.0%)比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。結(jié)論盆腔臟器脫垂采用Prolift全盆懸吊術(shù)重建盆底功能,其療效優(yōu)于經(jīng)陰道子宮切除+陰道前后壁修補(bǔ)術(shù)。
[Abstract]:Objective to explore the difference of clinical effect between Prolift total pelvic suspension and vaginal hysterectomy and vaginal anterior and posterior wall repair in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Methods 90 patients with prolapse of pelvic viscera were treated with Prolift total pelvic suspension for 30 cases as observation group and 60 cases as control group treated by vaginal hysterectomy before and after vaginal wall repair. The time of operation, the amount of blood lost during operation, the time of retention of urinary catheterization, the time of hospitalization, the length of vagina after operation and the curative effect were compared between the two groups. Results the operative time [(69.5 鹵11.3) min] in the observation group was shorter than that in the control group [(124.7 鹵14.0) min], and the intraoperative bleeding volume [(58.7 鹵18.0) mL] was less than that in the control group [(133.5 鹵26.4) mL)]. The difference was statistically significant (P0.05). There was no significant difference between the observation group and the control group (5.3 鹵1.2 days, 8.2 鹵1.7 days) and the control group (5.7 鹵1.5), (8.5 鹵2.0 days, P0.05). The vaginal length in the observation group [(6.39 鹵0.45) cm] was not significantly different from that in the preoperative group [(6.42 鹵0.47) cm] (P0.05), and was larger than that in the control group [(5.86 鹵0.55) cm] (P0.05). The cure rate in the observation group (93.33%) was higher than that in the control group (73.33%), the difference was statistically significant (P0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the observation group (10.0%) was not significantly different from that in the control group (15.0%) (P0.05). Conclusion the pelvic floor function was reconstructed by Prolift total pelvic suspension, and the effect was better than that of transvaginal hysterectomy and anterior and posterior vaginal wall repair.
【作者單位】： 首都醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬北京安貞醫(yī)院婦產(chǎn)科;北京朝陽醫(yī)院婦產(chǎn)科;
【基金】：首都醫(yī)學(xué)發(fā)展科研基金資助項(xiàng)目(2011-2003-03)
【分類號(hào)】：R713

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 鄧桂霞;;盆腔臟器脫垂常用術(shù)式臨床分析[J];現(xiàn)代醫(yī)院;2009年11期

2 毛麗麗;王武亮;王利君;;手術(shù)治療盆腔臟器脫垂145例分析[J];中國現(xiàn)代藥物應(yīng)用;2011年06期

3 陳冬鑾;宋巖峰;宋健;鄭昕燁;莊蓉蓉;;高齡女性盆腔臟器脫垂手術(shù)的療效分析[J];臨床軍醫(yī)雜志;2011年03期

4 孫選;解梅林;孔守芳;李旭日;;46例老年婦女盆腔臟器脫垂手術(shù)治療的臨床分析[J];現(xiàn)代婦產(chǎn)科進(jìn)展;2012年01期

5 謝虹;趙芳;;普通補(bǔ)片懸吊在治療女性盆腔臟器脫垂中的療效研究[J];中國婦幼保健;2013年01期

6 曾平;;傳統(tǒng)陰式全子宮切除術(shù)加陰道前后壁修補(bǔ)術(shù)在盆腔臟器脫垂治療中的應(yīng)用分析[J];中國老年保健醫(yī)學(xué);2013年05期

7 褚淑華;;改良全盆底重建術(shù)治療女性盆腔臟器脫垂的近期療效研究[J];現(xiàn)代預(yù)防醫(yī)學(xué);2014年03期

8 程學(xué)軍;修復(fù)盆腔臟器脫垂以改善患者生活質(zhì)量[J];國外醫(yī)學(xué).婦產(chǎn)科學(xué)分冊(cè);2004年06期

9 楊欣;王建六;;盆腔臟器脫垂治療進(jìn)展[J];中國婦產(chǎn)科臨床雜志;2007年01期

10 嚴(yán)德文;趙秀敏;朱丹陽;;改良全盆底重建術(shù)治療女性盆腔臟器脫垂56例近期療效評(píng)價(jià)[J];實(shí)用婦產(chǎn)科雜志;2009年11期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前8條

1 陳賢t，

本文編號(hào)：2352823