两种宫颈锥切方法治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ级的临床疗效评价  

Different Cervical Conization in the Treatment of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Ⅲ

作　　者：马利国 李明娥 谢红 杨菊芳 陈递林 

机构地区：[1]暨南大学第二临床医学院深圳市人民医院,广东深圳518020

出　　处：《实用妇产科杂志》2010年第2期118-120,共3页Journal of Practical Obstetrics and Gynecology

摘　　要：目的:评价宫颈冷刀锥切术(CKC)和宫颈环行电切除术(LEEP)治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ级(CINⅢ)的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析我院2003年12月至2007年9月宫颈病专科门诊收治的199例CINⅢ患者的临床资料,比较CKC和LEEP两种手术方法治疗CINⅢ的临床疗效。结果:CKC组术中出血量多于LEEP组,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01);CKC组手术时间长于LEEP组,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01);术后两组病灶的残留率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后病变复发率CKC组低于LEEP组,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。CKC组术后高危HPV持续感染率低于LEEP组,两组比较差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论:两种方法治疗CINⅢ,LEEP出血少、手术时间短、易于被患者接受,但CKC在减少复发及高危HPV持续感染方面优于LEEP。Objective：To evaluate the clinical effects of cold knife conization （CKC） and loop electrosurgical excision procedure （LEEP） in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Ⅲ （CIN Ⅲ ）. Methods：A retrospective analysis of the clinical data was carrried out in 199 cases with CIN Ⅲ from December 2003 to September 2007. The clinical effects of CKC and LEEP in the treatment of CIN Ⅲ were compared. Results： The blood loss during operation in CKC group was significantly more than that in LEEP group. There was highly statistic significance （ P〈0.01 ）. The operation time of CKC was longer than that of LEEP （ P〈 0.01 ）. There was no statistically significant difference of residual rate between these two groups（ P〉0.05 ）, but the recurrent rate in CKC group was significantly lower than that in LEEP group （ P 〈 0.05 ）. There was highly statistic significance. The high risk HPV persistent infection rate after operation in CKC group was sig- nificantly lower than that in LEEP group （ P 〈 0.01 ）. Conclusions： For proper treatment of CINⅢ, alough fewer blood loss, shorter operation time and being acceptable for patients of LEEP, CKC is super selection to LEEP with low recurrent and low high risk HPV persistent infection rates.

关 键 词：宫颈上皮内瘤变 宫颈冷刀锥切术 宫颈环形电切除术 

分 类 号：R737.33[医药卫生—肿瘤]