论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较两种保守治疗方案治疗输卵管妊娠的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析药物治疗和保守性输卵管手术治疗215例输卵管妊娠患者的临床资料,对比两种治疗方案的治愈时间、治疗后输卵管通畅率、宫内妊娠率和再次异位妊娠率。结果:药物组与手术组的治愈时间分别为(16.51±6.15)天和(6.07±1.25)天,输卵管通畅率分别为67.05%和95.38%,宫内妊娠率为61.17%和83.84%,异位妊娠率为9.41%和8.46%,手术组效果优于药物组。结论:对于有生育要求的输卵管妊娠患者保守性手术为最理想的治疗方案,治疗后的输卵管通畅率及宫内妊娠率明显高于保守性药物治疗。
Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of two conservative treatment regimens in the treatment of tubal pregnancy. Methods: The clinical data of 215 patients with tubal pregnancy treated by drug therapy and conservative tubal surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The cure time, tubal patency rate, intrauterine pregnancy rate and re-ectopic pregnancy rate were compared between the two treatment regimens. Results: The cure time of the drug group and the operation group were (16.51 ± 6.15) days and (6.07 ± 1.25) days respectively, the tubal patency rate was 67.05% and 95.38% respectively, and the intrauterine pregnancy rates were 61.17% and 83.84% Pregnancy rates were 9.41% and 8.46%, respectively. The effect of operation group was better than that of drug group. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative surgery for tubal pregnancy patients with fertility requirements is the best treatment option. The postoperative tubal patency rate and intrauterine pregnancy rate were significantly higher than those of conservative drug treatment.