切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2016, Vol. 09 ›› Issue (03): 168 -171. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6899.2016.03.011

所属专题: 文献资源库

论著 上一篇    下一篇

改良腹腔镜辅助阴式切除巨大子宫临床疗效探究
常蕊 1, 刘阳 1, 冯彩霞 1, 刘尚华 1, 王楠 1, 高燕云 1 , ( )   
  1. 1. 719000 榆林,陕西省榆林市第一医院妇产科
  • 收稿日期:2016-04-19 出版日期:2016-06-30
  • 通信作者: 高燕云

Clinical effect of improved laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy for the removal of large uterus

Rui Chang 1, Yang Liu 1, Caixia Feng 1, Shanghua Liu 1, Nan Wang 1, Yanyun Gao 1 , ( )   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yulin First Hospital of Shanxi Province, Yulin City, Yulin 719000, China
  • Received:2016-04-19 Published:2016-06-30
  • Corresponding author: Yanyun Gao
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Gao Yanyun. Email:
目的

评估改良腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术(LAVH)切除巨大子宫的临床疗效,探讨其价值和意义。

方法

回顾性分析180例接受LAVH患者的临床资料,平均年龄(49.4±8.5)岁,分为观察组(子宫体积 ≥ 12孕周)和对照组(子宫体积 < 12孕周),比较两组的一般资料、手术时间、术中出血量、输血率、平均住院时间、并发症发生率、中转开腹率等指标。

结果

两组的平均年龄、体质量指数符合正态分布且差异无统计学意义;观察组子宫体积较对照组大[(15.4±3.6)孕周 vs (7.6±2.2)孕周],两组疾病构成亦有区异 (P<0.001);观察组的平均手术时间[(83.9±32.9)min vs(50.6±20.8)min(P<0.001)]、术中出血量[(259.4±122.6)ml vs (150.9±95.1)ml(P<0.001)]和输血率[8例(10.3%)vs 2例(2.0%)(P=0.016)]均多于对照组,差异有统计学意义;两组手术并发症发生率、平均住院时间和中转开腹率差异无统计学意义。

结论

改良LAVH切除巨大子宫是安全、可靠的,尽管观察组术中出血量和手术时间高于对照组,但并不增加手术并发症发生率和平均住院时间,需注意适应证的选择和术者手术技巧的掌握。

Objective

To evaluate the clinical effect of the improved laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy for the removal of huge uterine and to explore its value and significance.

Methods

The clinical data of 180 patients undergoing laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy were analyzed retrospectively. Average age(49.4±8.5) years old. All patients were divided into observation group (uterine ≥ 12 weeks) and control group (uterus< 12 weeks). Indicators were compared with the two groups of cases of general information, operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion rate, average hospitalization days, incidence of complications, and conversion rate.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age and BMI. The uterine size of the observation group was larger than that of the control group[(15.4±3.6)weeks vs (7.6±2.2)weeks], and there were also differences in disease constitute between two groups (P<0.001). In the observation group, the average operation time[(83.9±32.9)min vs (50.6±20.8)min(P<0.001)], intraoperative blood loss[(259.4±122.6)ml vs (150.9±95.1)ml (P<0.001)] and blood transfusion rate[8(10.3%)vs 2(2.0%)(P=0.016)] were more than those in the control group, the difference was statistically significant. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of surgical complications, the average hospitalization days and the rate of conversion to laparotomy.

Conclusions

The improved laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy for the removal of the uterus is safe and reliable. Although the amount of intraoperative bleeding and operation time in the observation group was higher than the control group, but the incidence of surgical complications and the average hospitalization days did not increase. Following strict operation indications and operation technique are the keys to get the best result.

表1 腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除患者的两组临床特征比较
表2 腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除患者的两组手术指标比较
表3 腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除患者的两组手术并发症比较(例数)
1
Song T, Kim MK, Kim ML, et al.A Randomized Comparison of Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Hysterectomies: Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Laparoscopically Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2015, 25(7): 541-547.
2
Shiota M, Kotani Y, Umemoto M, et al. Total abdominal hysterectomy versus laparoscopically-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total vaginal hysterectomy[J]. Asian J Endosc Surg, 2011, 4(4): 161-165.
3
Litwińska, Nowak M, Kolasa-Zwierzchowska D, et al. Vaginal hysterectomy vs. laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy in women with symptomatic uterine leiomyomas: a retrospective study[J]. Prz Menopauzalny, 2014, 13(4): 242-246.
4
Guo Y, Tian X, Wang L. Laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy vs vaginal hysterectomy: meta analysis[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2013, 20(1): 15-21.
5
Schollmeyer T, Elessawy M, Chastamouratidhs B, et al. Hysterectomy trends over a 9-year period in an endoscopic teaching center[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2014, 126(1): 45-49.
6
Elessawy M, Schollmeyer T, Mettler L, et al. The incidence of complications by hysterectomy for benign disease in correlation to an assumed preoperative score[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2015, 292(1): 127-133.
7
Drahonovsky J, Haakova L, Otcenasek M, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of vaginal hysterectomy, laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy, and total laparoscopic hysterectomy in women with benign uterine disease[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2010, 148(2): 172-176.
8
杨晓棠. 基层医院开展妇科腹腔镜恶性肿瘤手术的临床研究[J/CD]. 中华腔镜外科杂志:电子版,2012,5(2): 148-149.
9
Agdi M, Tulandi T. Minimally invasive approach for myomectomy[J]. Semin Reprod Med, 2010, 28(3): 228-234.
10
Chang WC, Chu LH, Huang PS, et al. Comparison of Laparoscopic Myomectomy in Large Myomas With and Without Leuprolide Acetate[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2015, 22(6): 992-996.
11
Wong F,Lee E,应小燕. 通过腹腔镜子宫切除术(LH)和改良小切口经腹子宫切除术(MAH)切除巨大子宫的回顾性分析——子宫切除术手术路径的再评价[J]. 中国微创外科杂志,2011,10(4): 289-294.
12
Jahan S, Jahan A, Joarder M, et al. Laparoscopic hysterectomy in large uteri: Experience from a tertiary care hospital in Bangladesh[J]. Asian J Endosc Surg, 2015, 8(3): 323-327.
13
李卫民,王芳,王艳明,等. LigaSure与双极电刀在腹腔镜巨大子宫切除术中的联合应用[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志,2015,20(12): 896-898.
14
郭哲. 腹腔镜下巨大子宫切除术57例临床分析[J]. 郑州大学学报(医学版),2012,47(2): 270-272.
15
孙大为. 单孔腹腔镜手术在妇科的应用探讨[J/CD]. 中华腔镜外科杂志:电子版,2013,6(1): 5-8.
16
邓锁,卢美松,韩旭,等. 腹腔镜下大子宫次全切除术113例分析[J]. 哈尔滨医科大学学报,2011,45(5): 489-490.
17
张玲. 宫颈巨大肌瘤术中输尿管损伤23例分析[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2012,28(8): 631-632.
18
牟华平,袁志平,张川利,等. 腹腔镜下肌瘤剥除术治疗巨大宫颈肌瘤的临床效果和安全性[J]. 中国肿瘤临床与康复,2016,23(1): 82-84.
[1] 王伟, 王坤, 孙涛, 茹玉航, 刘晓. 血清肝素结合蛋白、C-反应蛋白和降钙素原对肺癌电视胸腔镜术后肺部细菌感染的预测价值[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 257-262.
[2] 李海寿, 尹林, 黄子健, 韦合雷, 莫毓. 胰十二指肠切除术中两种胰肠吻合方式的临床对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 396-399.
[3] 邵得志, 冯志毅, 郭乃超, 吕衍霖, 王晓翠, 董宇豪. 急性非结石性胆囊炎42例诊治分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 434-436.
[4] 陈家先, 宋春, 段春宁, 孙建伟. 内镜下难治性胆总管结石行ERCP取石的安全性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 437-439.
[5] 张娟, 张艳芳, 马静, 杨雷, 吴华彰, 李灵艳, 叶枫林. ERAS对胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者术后康复及应激因子的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 444-446.
[6] 孙龙, 郝迎学, 王明启. 介入技术结合腔内修复手术治疗复杂腹主动脉瘤26例临床随访分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 464-467.
[7] 朱蜀侠, 李康, 王宇, 袁丹, 刘东亮. 输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术后肾包膜下血肿三例报告并文献复习[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 347-351.
[8] 金曜, 徐继宗, 杨帆, 张弦. 开放腹壁疝网片修补术早期并发症的影响因素分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 398-400.
[9] 马懿迪, 王素美. 疝外科网片在盆腔脏器脱垂治疗中的应用现状及展望[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(04): 325-328.
[10] 陈华萍, 甘志新, 刘刚, 刘双林, 刘禹, 焦玉丁, 缪殿南, 徐静, 王关嵩, 徐智, 李琦, 胡明冬. 慢性阻塞性肺疾病的合并症/并发症的发病率和病死率分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 417-421.
[11] 陈波, 张科, 于明帅, 马荷荷. 腹部手术患者术后肺部并发症风险预测模型构建[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 502-504.
[12] 郭亚飞, 刘国岩, 朱泽斌, 栗雪峰, 吴维, 黄德好, 刘连新. 解剖性肝动脉重建在肝移植中的应用价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2021, 10(04): 376-380.
[13] 高建平, 李爽, 孙震, 祁冰, 张庆凯, 张桂信, 尚东. 术前减黄在中度恶性梗阻性黄疸胰十二指肠切除中的价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2021, 10(04): 381-385.
[14] 邓俊晖, 肖凯华, 陈志玉, 黄稳达, 杨家君, 黄玉宝, 黄学军. 吻合器部分痔环切钉合联合选择性内痔缝扎术治疗环状痔的可行性和疗效[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2021, 10(04): 413-417.
[15] 周君, 石星原, 张庆玲, 刘向辉, 郭运林, 张之营, 张建. 颅骨修补术后癫痫发作的预后分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(05): 356-359.
阅读次数
全文


摘要