宫颈冷刀锥切术和宫颈环形电切术治疗宫颈高级别上皮内瘤变临床疗效对比分析  

Analysis and comparison of the effectiveness of cold-knife conization and loop electrosurgical excision in treating high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

作　　者：林洁[1] 刘彬[1] 陈桂林 郭慈仁[1] 陈炜[1] LIN Jie,LIU Bin,CHEN Guilin,GUO Ciren,CHEN Wei(Department of Gynaecology,Fujian Medical University Cancer Hospital ＆ Fujian Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou , Fujian 350014, China)

机构地区：[1]福建医科大学附属肿瘤医院福建省肿瘤医院妇科,福州350014

出　　处：《福建医药杂志》2018年第3期37-39,共3页Fujian Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的探讨宫颈冷刀锥切术(CKC)和宫颈环形电切术(LEEP)治疗宫颈高级别上皮内瘤变的疗效。方法收集2014年1月至2017年12月我院收治的宫颈高级别上皮内瘤变患者371例,其中172例行CKC,199例行LEEP。比较两组的手术指标、术后并发症及术后病理情况。结果其手术时间、术中出血量及术后并发症,LEEP组明显低于CKC组(P<0.05),但LEEP组术后病理切缘阳性率明显高于CKC组(P<0.05),CKC组的病理升级情况较LEEP组多(P<0.05)。结论虽然LEEP更快捷、出血少、恢复快,但为了获得准确的病理指导后续治疗,建议无生育要求的女性首选CKC。Objective To investigate the effectiveness of Cold-Knife Conization（CKC）and Loop Electrosurgical Excision（LEEP）in the treatment of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.Methods From January 2014 to December 2017,data of 371 cases of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia were collected in our hospital,which included 172 patients treated by CKC and 199 patients treated by LEEP.The surgical indexes,postoperative complications and pathological conditions were compared between two groups.Results The average operation time,blood loss and postoperative complications of LEEP group were significantly lower than CKC group（P〈0.05）,but the positive cutting edge rate of LEEP group was significantly higher than CKC group（P〈0.05）,pathological upgrade was more detected in CKC group（P〈0.05）.Conclusion Although LEEP has advantages of less blood loss,shorter operation time and quicker recovery,but in order to get the accurate pathology to guide the follow-up treatment,CKC was preferred in patients without fertility requirements.

关 键 词：宫颈高级别上皮内瘤变 宫颈冷刀锥切术 宫颈环形电切术 疗效 

分 类 号：R737.33[医药卫生—肿瘤]