目的 探讨腹腔镜辅助下阴式子宫切除术(LAVH)的临床应用价值.方法 对121例需行子宫全切术的患者,按入院先后随机分为两组:A组(LAVH组)61例,B组(TVH组)60例.A组行LAVH,B组行单纯阴式子宫全切术(TVH).分别对两组的临床疗效(手术时间、术中出血量、术后肛门排气时间、术后住院时间、术后阴道残端感染率)进行观察.结果 手术时间:A组[(125±27)min]较B组[(130±22)min]无明显延长(P＞0.05)；术中出血量:A组[(121±70)]ml较B组[(141±73)]ml明显减少(P＜0.05)；肛门排气时间:A组[(26.2±7.3)]h较B组[(49.6±13.4)h]明显缩短(P＜0.05)；住院时间:A组[(5±1)d]明显短于B组[(6±3)]d(P＜0.05).阴道残端感染率:A组(1.6％)明显少于B组(8.33％),有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 LAVH明显优于单纯TVH,是一种较为理想的手术方法,值得临床推广应用.%Objective To explore the clinical value of the laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH). Methods According to hospital, 121 patients required hysterectomy were randomly divided into two groups: B group (treatment group,6leases) ;the B group (control group,60 cases). The A group were under LAVH, the B group with simple transvaginal hysterectomy(TVH). Respectively, the clinical efficacy of 2 groups (including surgery time,blood loss, anal exhaust time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative vaginal stump infection rate) were observed. Results The operative time of A group(125±27)min was no markedly extended compared with the B group(130±22)min, (P> 0. 05) ;the blood loss of A group(121±70)ml was significantly less than that of the B group(141±73)ml, (P<0. 05);the anal exhaust time of A group(24. 2±7. L)h markedly shortened compared with the B group(49. 6dbl3. 4)h, (P<0. 05); the hospital stay of treatment group(5±l)d was less than that of the control group(6±3)d, (P<0. 05). The vaginal stump infection rates of treatment group(1/61)was less than that of the control group(5/60), (P<0. 05). Conclusion LAVH is significantly better than TVH, which is an ideal surgical method.
展开▼
