腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术(LAVH)与阴式子宫切除术(TVH)的临床效果比较.docVIP

腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术(LAVH)与阴式子宫切除术(TVH)的临床效果比较 　　[摘要] 目的 比较腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术（LAVH）与阴式子宫切除术（TVH）的临床效果。方法 回顾性分析2010年1月～2013年1月在我院行腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术（LAVH）100例与阴式子宫切除术（TVH）100例患者的临床资料。比较两种手术方式的临床疗效。结果 LAVH组手术时间长于TVH组[（130±15.2）min vs （90±13.4）min，P0.05]，胃肠道恢复时间LAVH组与TVH组[ （12.5±1.2） h vs （13.2±1.3）h，P0.05]。结论 LAVH与TVH比较具有术中出血少、术后并发症少、安全性高的特点，值得临床推广。 　　[关键词] 腹腔镜；辅助阴式；子宫切除术 　　[中图分类号] R713.42 [文献标识码] B [文章编号] 2095-0616（2014）04-167-03 　　Comparison of clinical efficacy between laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy and transvaginal hysterectomy 　　HE Min SU Qixu 　　The Peoples Hospital in Anshun City，Anshun 561000，China 　　[Abstract] Objective To compare the efficacy of laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy（LAVH） and transvaginal hysterectomy（TVH）. Methods Clinical data of 100 patients with LAVH and 100 patients with TVH who were treated in our hospital from January 2010 to January 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical results of these two surgical methods were compared. Results The operating time in LAVH was longer than that in TVH[（130±15.2）min vs. （90±13.4）min， P0.05]. The blood loss and postoperative complication rate in LAVH were lower than those in TVH[（88.4±12.1）mL vs. （93.2±14.2）mL； 0.01% vs. 0.04%； P0.05]. The hospital stay and recovery time of gastrointestinal function in LAVH were lower than those in TVH [（5.5±0.5）d vs. （5.6±0.5）d； 　　（12.5±1.2）h vs. （13.2±1.3）h； P0.05]. Conclusion The laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy is worthy of clinical application with less blood loss， fewer complications and higher safety compared with the transvaginal hysterectomy. 　　[Key words] Laparoscope；Assisted vaginal；Hysterectomy 　　因妇科疾病需切除子宫的患者，以往临床中大多选择经腹（TAH）进行[1]，自从1989年Reich等[2]介绍第1例腹腔镜辅助下阴式子宫切除术后，微创技术在妇科领域的运用迅速发展起来。本研究回顾性分析我院行腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术（LAVH）与阴式子宫切除术（TVH）的临床资料，比较两种术式的优缺点，以便对不同患者选择最佳的子宫切除方式。 　　1 资料与方法 　　1.1 一般资料 　　选取2010年1月～2013年1月于我院进行治疗的200例子宫切除术患者为研究对象，根据手术方式分为TVH组和LAVH组各100例。LAVH组的100例患者，子宫大小正常30例，孕12周70例，其中子宫内膜疾病6例，宫颈病变10例，子宫腺肌症20例，子宫肌瘤55例，功血9例；年龄35～60岁，平