不同治疗方法对剖宫产瘢痕妊娠的治疗效果  

Effect of Different Treatment Methods on Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

作　　者：刘艳生[1] 宫美玉 葛伟平[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东省青岛市市立医院妇科中心,青岛266000 [2]山东省威海市妇女儿童医院妇产科,威海264200

出　　处：《中国医药导刊》2017年第2期150-152,共3页Chinese Journal of Medicinal Guide

摘　　要：目的:对比分析在治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠应用不同治疗方式的临床效果。方法:依据治疗方式不同将我院2015年8月~2016年8月收治的54例剖宫产瘢痕妊娠患者随机分为两组,每组患者例数为27例,参照组患者采取常规肌肉注射甲氨蝶呤治疗,实验组患者采取介入栓塞术与子宫动脉灌注,对比分析两组患者住院时间、血β-HCG恢复正常时间、术中出血量以及总有效率。结果:实验组住院时间(6.24±1.89)、血β-HCG恢复正常时间(26.98±3.29)、术中出血量(28.38±5.27)等指标均显著优于参照组,组间数据差异比较显著,存在统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:在治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠中实行传统方式以及联合方式均能够得到一定效果,但介入栓塞术与介入栓塞术效果更加显著。Objective：To analysis application in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy for the clinical effect of different treatments.Methods：On the basis of treatment in a different way to the hospital from August 2015 to August 2016 during the diagnosis and treatment of 54 patients with cesarean scar pregnancy were randomly divided into two groups,each group of cases patients was 27 cases,control group patients treated with routine intramuscular methotrexate,take intervention group patients with uterine artery embolization perfusion,compared two groups of patients in hospital time,blood beta HCG returned to normal time,intraoperative blood loss and the total effective rate.Results：The length of hospital stay（6.24 ± 1.89） and blood beta HCG returned to normal time（26.98 ±3.29）,intraoperative blood loss（28.38 ±5.27）,and other indicators were significantly better than the control group,compare the significant difference between groups data,there is statistical significance（P〈0.05）.Conclusion：In the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy in a traditional way and the way the united were able to get a certain effect,but in interventional embolization and a more significant effect of interventional embolization.

关 键 词：不同治疗方法 剖宫产 瘢痕妊娠 效果 

分 类 号：R714.22[医药卫生—妇产科学]