首页> 外文期刊>The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research >Thermo‐coagulation versus cryotherapy for treatment of cervical precancers: A prospective analytical study in a low‐resource African setting
【24h】

Thermo‐coagulation versus cryotherapy for treatment of cervical precancers: A prospective analytical study in a low‐resource African setting

机译:热凝血与治疗宫颈癌的冷冻疗法:低资源非洲环境中的前瞻性分析研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Abstract Aims To evaluate the outcomes of cryotherapy and thermo‐coagulation in the treatment of cervical precancers. Method Prospective analytical study. Women who screened positive to visual inspection with acetic acid and confirmed by colposcopy using the Swede's score were randomized to receive either cryotherapy or thermo‐coagulation. Participants were re‐evaluated 6?months later. Results A total of 11?124 women were screened. Only 1023 of the 1294 colposcopically confirmed positive cases were eligible for ablative therapy. Five hundred and twelve women received cryotherapy while 511 women received thermo‐coagulation. Cryotherapy had similar cure rate with thermo‐coagulation (85.5 vs 89.2%, P =?0.09). The mean patient satisfaction score for thermo‐coagulation was higher than that for cryotherapy (3.9?±?1.3 vs 2.8?±?1.7; P ?0.0001). The mean duration of treatment per patient was higher for cryotherapy than thermo‐coagulation (660.0?±?0.0 vs 50.9?±?15.3?s, P ?0.0001). The mean cost of treatment per patient was significantly higher for cryotherapy than for thermo‐coagulation (2613.1?±?254.9 vs 533.2?±?45.2 Nigerian Naira, P ?0.0001). Higher proportion of women who had thermo‐coagulation reported no side effect (55.2 vs 12.5%, P ?0.0001). Conclusion Cryotherapy and thermo‐coagulation have similar efficacy in the treatment of cervical precancers. Thermo‐coagulation offers lower cost and lower duration of treatment, less side effects and higher patient satisfaction than cryotherapy. Thermo‐coagulation should be the recommended ablative treatment method for low‐resource settings of the world.
机译:摘要旨在评估冷冻疗法和热凝治疗宫颈癌前病变的疗效。方法前瞻性分析研究。经醋酸目视检查呈阳性并经阴道镜检查(使用瑞典人评分)确诊的女性随机接受冷冻治疗或热凝治疗。参与者被重新评估6?几个月后。结果总共11个?124名女性接受了筛查。在1294例阴道镜确诊阳性病例中,只有1023例符合消融治疗的条件。512名女性接受冷冻治疗,511名女性接受热凝治疗。冷冻疗法与热凝疗法的治愈率相似(分别为85.5%和89.2%,P=0.09)。热凝治疗的患者满意度平均得分高于冷冻治疗(3.9±1.3 vs 2.8±1.7;P;0.0001)。冷冻治疗患者的平均治疗时间高于热凝治疗(660.0±0.0 vs 50.9±15.3秒,P;0.0001)。冷冻疗法的平均每位患者治疗成本显著高于热凝疗法(2613.1±254.9比533.2±45.2尼日利亚奈拉,P;0.0001)。有热凝症的女性报告没有副作用的比例较高(55.2%对12.5%,P;?0.0001)。结论冷冻治疗和热凝治疗宫颈癌前病变的疗效相似。与冷冻疗法相比,热凝疗法成本更低,治疗持续时间更短,副作用更少,患者满意度更高。热凝固应是世界上低资源环境下推荐的烧蚀处理方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号