论文部分内容阅读
目的:对应用两种不同宫颈环形电切术治疗合并患有宫颈管炎的宫颈糜烂患者的临床效果进行对比研究。方法:抽取本院收治的94例合并患有宫颈管炎的宫颈糜烂患者,随机分为对照组和治疗组,平均每组47例。采用高频电波刀(LEEP)切除术对对照组患者实施治疗;在对照组基础上,采用小环形电极切除术对治疗组患者实施治疗。比较两组患者治疗总时间、在治疗期间出现的不良反应例数、治疗效果。结果:治疗组患者治疗时间明显短于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);在治疗期间出现的不良反应例数明显少于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗效果明显优于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:应用LEEP刀切除术基础上加用小环形电极切除术对合并患有宫颈管炎的宫颈糜烂患者实施治疗的临床效果非常明显。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects of two different types of cervical circumcision for cervical erosion with cervical erosion. Methods: A total of 94 patients with cervical erosion who had cervical canalitis were randomly divided into control group and treatment group, with an average of 47 cases in each group. The patients in the control group were treated by high frequency electrosurgical knife (LEEP). On the basis of the control group, patients in the treatment group were treated by small ring electrode resection. The total duration of treatment, the number of adverse reactions occurred during treatment, and the treatment effect were compared between the two groups. Results: The treatment time in the treatment group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (P <0.05). The number of adverse reactions in the treatment group was significantly less than that in the control group (P <0.05). The treatment effect was obviously superior to the control group, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: The application of LEEP knife resection combined with small ring electrode resection for cervical erosion with cervical erosion in patients with clinical efficacy of treatment is very obvious.