3种不同引产方法在瘢痕子宫中晚期妊娠中的应用效果对比观察

摘要

对比3种不同引产方法在瘢痕子宫中晚期妊娠中的应用效果。方法选取2010年3月-2013年11月该院收治的瘢痕子宫中晚期妊娠需要引产的患者155例，随机分为3组，其中A组51例，采用米非司酮基础上合用米索前列醇引产，B组53例，采用利凡诺引产，C组51例，采用水囊引产，观察并比较3组患者的平均引产时间、引产效果和需要清宫的人数。结果 A组平均引产时间（52.33±2.71） h,B组平均引产时间（61.73±3.99） h，C组平均引产时间（69.86±2.17） h，A组与B、C两组患者平均引产时间比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)；A组引产成功50（98.04%）例，B组引产成功47（88.68%）例，C组引产成功45（88.24%）例，A组与B、C两组患者引产成功率比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)；A组需要清宫人数明显少于B、C两组，A组与B、C两组需要清宫例数比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论米非司酮基础上合用米索前列醇引产引产成功率高，值得在临床上予以推广。%Objective To compare the effect of three different labor induction methods applied to late pregnancy with scar uterus. Methods 155 patients with scar uterus in late pregnancy needing labor induction admitted in our hospital from March, 2010 to November, 2013 were randomly divided into three groups. Mifepristone combined with misoprostol was given to the 51 patients in group A for labor induction, rivanol induction was given to the 53 patients in group B, and bladders abortion was given to the 51 patients in group C. The average induction time, induction effect and the number of patients needing curettage of the three groups were observed and compared. Results The average induction time of group A, group B and group C was (52.33±2.71)h, (61.73± 3.99)h,(69.86±2.17)h, respectively, the difference in induction time between group A and group B, group C two groups was statis-tically significant (P<0.05); The number of successful induction in group A was 50 cases (98.04%), that in group B was 47 cases (88.68%), and in group C was 45 cases (88.24%), the difference in success rate of abortion between patients in group A and pa-tients in group B and group C was statistically significant (P<0.05);the number of patients needing curettage in group A was much less than that in group B and group C, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion The labor induction success rate of mifepristone combined with misoprostol is higher, which is worthy of clinical promotion.