子宫切口妊娠两种治疗方法的比较研究  

Study of Two Therapeutic Methods in Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

作　　者：靳翠平[1] 尚玉敏[1] 

机构地区：[1]天津市天和医院,天津300050

出　　处：《中国初级卫生保健》2012年第2期42-44,共3页Chinese Primary Health Care

摘　　要：目的探讨将子宫切口妊娠治疗过程中,子宫动脉栓塞术后清宫与甲氨蝶呤药物保守治疗两种方法的有效性。方法将41例子宫切口妊娠患者分为子宫动脉栓塞术后清宫组26例,MTX肌注组15例,比较两种治疗方法在清宫术中出血量、患者治疗过程中血β-HCG下降程度及恢复正常时间、住院天数、转经时间及不良反应等方面情况。结果子宫动脉栓塞术后清宫组在有效减少手术出血、患者住院时间及转经时间、血β-HCG下降速度及恢复至正常时间等方面与甲氨蝶呤肌注组比较,均有显著统计学意义(P<0.05),且并未增加不良反应后果(P>0.05)。结论于子宫动脉栓塞术后清宫在治疗子宫切口妊娠疾病中,较甲氨蝶呤肌注给药疗效更确切,值得临床推广。OBJECTIVE To compare the availability between curettage of uterus after uterine artery embolization and methotrexate pharmacotherapy in cesarean scar pregnancy. METHODS 41 patients include 26 cases with curettage of uterus after uterine artery embolization and 15 cases with methotrexate pharmacotherapy, we make a comparition in blood volume, the descent of I3-HCG, hospital day, menstruation onset, and side reaction between the two groups. RESULT There is significant difference among the two groups in blood volume, the descent of β-HCG, hospital day, menstruation onset（P〈0.05）. CONCLUSION Curettage of uterus after uterine artery embolization is a safer and valider method in cesarean scar pregnancy than methotrexate pharmacotherapy.

关 键 词：子宫切口妊娠 子宫动脉栓塞术 清宫术 甲氨蝶呤 

分 类 号：R714.2[医药卫生—妇产科学]