腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术（LAVH）与阴式子宫切除术（TVH）的临床效果比较

摘要

Objective To compare the efficacy of laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy(LAVH) and transvaginal hysterectomy(TVH). Methods Clinical data of 100 patients with LAVH and 100 patients with TVH who were treated in our hospital from January 2010 to January 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical results of these two surgical methods were compared. Results The operating time in LAVH was longer than that in TVH[(130±15.2) minvs. (90±13.4)min, P<0.05]. The blood loss and postoperative complication rate in LAVH were lower than those in TVH[(88.4±12.1)mLvs. (93.2±14.2)mL; 0.01% vs. 0.04%; P < 0.05]. The hospital stay and recovery time of gastrointestinal function in LAVH were lower than those in TVH [(5.5±0.5)d vs. (5.6±0.5)d;(12.5±1.2)hvs. (13.2±1.3)h; P < 0.05]. Conclusion The laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy is worthy of clinical application with less blood loss, fewer complications and higher safety compared with the transvaginal hysterectomy.%目的：比较腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术（LAVH）与阴式子宫切除术（TVH）的临床效果。方法回顾性分析2010年1月～2013年1月在我院行腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术（LAVH）100例与阴式子宫切除术（TVH）100例患者的临床资料。比较两种手术方式的临床疗效。结果 LAVH组手术时间长于TVH组[（130±15.2）min vs（90±13.4）min，P＜0.05]，术中出血量LAVH组与TVH组[(88.4±12.1) mL vs （93.2±14.2）mL，P＜0.05]，术后并发症LAVH组与TVH组（0.01%vs 0.04%，P＜0.05）；住院时间LAVH组与TVH组[（5.5±0.5) d vs（5.6±0.5）d，P＞0.05]，胃肠道恢复时间LAVH组与TVH组[(12.5±1.2) h vs（13.2±1.3）h，P＞0.05]。结论 LAVH与TVH比较具有术中出血少、术后并发症少、安全性高的特点，值得临床推广。