切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版)

中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (04): 229 -232. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6899.2020.04.008

所属专题： 文献资源库；

论著 上一篇    下一篇

异常子宫出血NovaSure子宫内膜去除术后再干预的危险因素分析
张露平 1, 尚宏瑜 1, 李文君 1, 赵辉 1, 郭蕾 1, 张生澎 1, 冯力民 1 , †( )   
  1. 1. 100070 北京，首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院妇产科
  • 收稿日期:2020-06-09 出版日期:2020-08-30
  • 通信作者: 冯力民

High-risk factors of re-intervention after NovaSure endometrial ablation in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding

Luping Zhang 1, Hongyu Shang 1, Wenjun Li 1, Hui Zhao 1, Lei Guo 1, Shengpeng Zhang 1, Limin Feng 1 , †( )   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100070, China
  • Received:2020-06-09 Published:2020-08-30
  • Corresponding author: Limin Feng
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Feng Limin, Email:
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( )
目的

探讨和分析NovaSure子宫内膜去除术后患者再次干预的高危因素。

方法

回顾性分析2011年1月至2018年1月就诊于首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院妇产科，行NovaSure子宫内膜去除术的192例异常子宫出血患者的临床资料，包括患者的一般信息及病史相关特征、超声结果及手术记录中的相关资料，通过单因素分析以及Logistic回归分析的方法找出子宫内膜去除术后需再次手术干预的高危因素，分析这类患者的临床特点。

结果

本研究192例异常子宫出血患者中，20例(10.42%)术后2年内需再次手术干预，其中13例表现为阴道出血，3例表现为腹痛，4例则两种症状均有。单因素分析提示NovaSure子宫内膜去除术后再次干预与年龄、月经失血图评分、腹痛的视觉模拟评分、子宫腺肌症以及术后是否放置曼月乐有关(P<0.05)；而与体质量指数、孕产次、宫腔深度、子宫体积、剖宫产史、合并子宫肌瘤无关(P>0.05)。多因素分析提示年龄、子宫腺肌症、腹痛的视觉模拟评分及术后是否放置曼月乐是再次干预患者的独立影响因素(P<0.05)。

结论

年龄、子宫腺肌症、腹痛的视觉模拟评分及术后是否放置曼月乐是异常子宫出血患者NovaSure子宫内膜去除术后需再次干预的独立影响因素，而阴道出血是再次干预患者的主要临床表现。

关键词: 异常子宫出血, 子宫内膜去除, 宫腔镜, 高危因素
Objective

To analyze the characteristics and risk factors of patients undergoing re-intervention for failed NovaSure endometrial ablation.

Methods

This study is a retrospective cohort study. A total of 192 patients with abnormal uterine bleeding underwent NovaSure endometrial ablation at the department of gynaecology of Beijing Tiantan Hospital from Jan. 2011 to Jan. 2018. The clinical data of these patients were collected, including the basic information, the characteristics of the patient′s medical history and symptom, ultrasound results and the data of the surgical records. Univariate analysis and Logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the characteristics and risk factors of patients undergoing re-intervention for failed NovaSure endometrial ablation.

Results

A total of 192 people were eventually included in this study. 20(10.42%) patients need re-intervention after 2 year of the surgery, 13patients were vaginal bleeding, 3 patients were abdominal pain and 4 patients had both symptoms. Univariate analysis suggested that re-intervention after NovaSure was correlated with age, scores of PBLAC, Visual Analogue Score, adenomyosis and whether to use Mirena (P<0.05). The number of parity and gravity, BMI, the length of uterine cavity, uterine volume, the history of cesarean section, intramural fibroid, were not the risk factors (P>0.05). Multivariable binary logistic regression indicated that age, adenomyosis, Visual Analogue Score and whether to use Mirena were independent factors for re-intervention (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Age, adenomyosis, Visual Analogue Score and whether to use Mirena were independent predictor of patients undergoing re-intervention for failed NovaSure endometrial ablation, and vaginal bleeding was the main clinical manifestation of the patients for re-intervention.

Key words: Abnormal uterine bleeding, Endometrial ablation, Hysteroscopy, High-risk factors
表1 NovaSure子宫内膜去除术后再次手术干预的单因素分析
因素 干预组(20例) 正常组(172例) 统计值 P值
年龄(岁， ±s) 42.50±4.35 46.62±4.52 t＝3.867 <0.001
BMI(kg/m2， ±s) 25.48±2.73 25.45±2.74 t＝0.050 0.960
孕(次， ±s) 2.80±1.70 2.85±1.43 t＝0.158 0.875
产(次， ±s) 1.35±0.75 1.46±0.74 t＝0.622 0.535
PBLAC评分(分) 485.00(258.25～598.75) 232.50(125.00～478.75) Z＝-2.615 0.009
VAS评分(分) 6(3～8) 0(0～4) Z＝-3.506 <0.001
宫腔深度(cm， ±s) 9.03±0.79 8.88±1.06 t＝0.611 0.542
子宫体积(cm， ±s) 17.86±2.19 17.14±2.64 t＝1.166 0.245
放置曼月乐[例(%)] 3(15.00) 70(40.70) χ2＝3.990 0.046
剖宫产史[例(%)] 8(40.00) 61(35.47) χ2＝0.160 0.689
子宫腺肌症[例(%)] 11(55.00) 39(22.67) χ2＝9.721 0.002
子宫平滑肌瘤[例(%)] 7(35.00) 71(41.28) χ2＝0.293 0.588
表2 NovaSure子宫内膜去除术后再次手术干预的多因素分析
因素 Beta SE Wald OR值(95% CI) P值
年龄 0.174 0.062 7.816 0.840(0.744～0.949) 0.005
子宫腺肌症 1.413 0.656 4.645 4.110(1.137～14.863) 0.031
VAS评分 0.206 0.090 5.306 1.229(1.031～1.465) 0.021
放置曼月乐 -2.609 0.819 10.141 0.074(0.015～0.367) 0.001
1
Shazly SA, Famuyide AO, El-Nashar SA, et al. Intraoperative predictors of long-term outcomes after radiofrequency endometrial ablation [J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2016，23(4): 582-589.
2
Gimpelson RJ. Ten-year literature review of global endometrial ablation with the NovaSure device [J]. Int J Womens Health, 2014，6(1): 269-280.
3
Marjoribanks J, Lethaby A, Farquhar C. Surgery versus medical therapy for heavy menstrual bleeding [J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2016.

URL    
4
Athanatos D, Pados G, Venetis CA, et al. Novasure impedance control system versus microwave endometrial ablation for the treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial [J]. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol, 2015，42(3): 347-351.
5
Gallinat A. An impedance-controlled system for endometrial ablation: five-year follow-up of 107 patients [J]. J Reprod Med, 2007，52(6): 467-472.
6
Fulop T, Rakoczi I, Barna I. NovaSure impedance controlled endometrial ablation: long-term follow-up results [J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2007，14(1): 85-90.
7
Herman MC, Penninx JP, Mol BW, et al. Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding [J]. BJOG, 2013，120(8): 966-970.
8
Higham JM, O’Brien PM, Shaw RW. Assessment of menstrual blood loss using a pictorial chart [J]. Br J Obstet Gynaecol, 1990，97(8): 734-739.
9
Comino R, Torrejon R. Hysterectomy after endometrial ablation-resection [J]. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc, 2004，11(4): 495-499.
10
Peeters JA, Penninx JP, Mol BW, et al. Prognostic factors for the success of endometrial ablation in the treatment of menorrhagia with special reference to previous cesarean section [J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2013，167(1): 100-103.
11
Longinotti MK, Jacobson GF, Hung YY, et al. Probability of hysterectomy after endometrial ablation [J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2008，112(6): 1214-1220.
12
Thomassee MS, Curlin H, Yunker A, et al. Predicting pelvic pain after endometrial ablation: which preoperative patient characteristics are associated[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2013，20(5): 642-647.
13
Soini T, Rantanen M, Paavonen J, et al. Long-term follow-up after endometrial ablation in finland [J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2017，130(3): 554-560.
14
Mengerink BB, Wurff AA, Ter Haar JF, et al. Effect of undiagnosed deep adenomyosis after failed NovaSure endometrial ablation [J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2015，22(2): 239-244.
15
Lin CJ, Hsu TF, Chang YH, et al. Postoperative maintenance levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for symptomatic uterine adenomyoma [J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2018, 57(1): 47-51.
16
Zhao H, Yang BJ, Feng LM, et al. Comparison of combined bipolar radiofrequency impedance-controlled endometrial ablation with levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation alone in women with abnormal uterine bleeding[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2020, 27(3): 774-780.
17
楼俊瑶，黄秀峰，张丽凤，等．第二代子宫内膜消融术可提高左炔诺孕酮宫内节育系统对子宫腺肌病患者的疗效[J]. 浙江大学学报(医学版), 2019, 48(2): 136-141.
18
Park DS, Kim ML, Song TJ, et al. Clinical experiences of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in patients with large symptomatic adenomyosis [J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 2015，54(4): 412-415.
[1] 戴晨燕, 胡娅莉, 朱湘虹, 汤晓秋, 王慧焱, 朱慧, 李亚玲. 经腹部超声实时引导在重度宫腔粘连宫腔镜手术中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2020, 17(05): 447-450.
[2] 马黔红. 生殖医学中的宫腔镜应用[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 17(05): 620-.
[3] 袁瑞. 宫腔镜对宫颈管病变的诊治 [J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 17(03): 373-373.
[4] 石钢. 宫腔镜下女性生殖道异物取出术[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2021, 17(02): 249-.
[5] 魏宝宝, 刘辉. 子宫内膜非典型性息肉样腺肌瘤的临床分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(04): 417-422.
[6] 程丹, 龚月宾, 陈娇, 李雪瑶, 王笑臣, 屈兵, 杨菁. 羊膜移植在宫腔镜下宫腔黏连分离术后预防宫腔黏连复发中的有效性和安全性[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2019, 15(04): 420-425.
[7] 张博, 王金娟, 张露. 宫腔镜下宫颈锥切术和宫颈冷刀锥切术治疗绝经后女性宫颈上皮内瘤变2级临床对比研究[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2018, 14(06): 663-667.
[8] 徐迅, 鲁春雁, 赵欣, 陶颖娜. 改良输卵管保守性手术对输卵管壶腹部妊娠患者生殖状态的影响[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2018, 14(04): 419-426.
[9] 杨锋, 谢玲, 林秋兰. 早产儿宫内感染性肺炎和支气管肺发育不良发生的高危因素[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2020, 14(04): 326-330.
[10] 陈洪娇, 谭春苗, 王玉芸, 冼丽娜. 危重症患者发生呼吸机相关性肺炎肺部微生态及高危因素分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(03): 376-378.
[11] 赵辉, 李海霞, 杨保军, 冯力民. 诺舒子宫内膜去除术治疗异常子宫出血的远期疗效分析[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(04): 211-216.
[12] 黄春玉, 冯力民, 杨保军, 李春霞. 宫腔镜在妊娠期宫颈息肉治疗中的应用[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(02): 81-84.
[13] 彭燕蓁, 段华, 成九梅, 闫硕, 苏琦. 阴道内镜技术在门诊宫腔镜检查中的应用价值[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2020, 13(01): 36-40.
[14] 花茂方, 王媛, 姚军. 子宫肌壁间妊娠：宫腔镜及腹腔镜成功诊治一例并文献复习[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2019, 12(04): 250-252.
[15] 何林, 余美佳, 李红雨, 谭琼, 易淑华, 王丹, 常青. 肩难产紧急处理16例分析[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2020, 09(01): 44-48.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号