切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华产科急救电子杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 08 ›› Issue (02) : 116 -120. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3259.2019.02.011

所属专题: 妇产科超声影像学 文献

论著

高强度超声聚焦对剖宫产瘢痕部位妊娠的治疗效果
林琼燕1, 郝世辉1, 谭琳1, 刘娟1,()   
  1. 1. 510150 广州医科大学附属第三医院妇产科
  • 收稿日期:2019-03-05 出版日期:2019-05-18
  • 通信作者: 刘娟
  • 基金资助:
    广州医科大学博士启动项目资助(2016C24)

Therapeutic effect of high-intensity focused ultrasound in caesarean scar pregnancy

Qiongyan Lin1, Shihui Hao1, Lin Tan1, Juan Liu1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China
  • Received:2019-03-05 Published:2019-05-18
  • Corresponding author: Juan Liu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Liu Juan, Email:
引用本文:

林琼燕, 郝世辉, 谭琳, 刘娟. 高强度超声聚焦对剖宫产瘢痕部位妊娠的治疗效果[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2019, 08(02): 116-120.

Qiongyan Lin, Shihui Hao, Lin Tan, Juan Liu. Therapeutic effect of high-intensity focused ultrasound in caesarean scar pregnancy[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetric Emergency(Electronic Edition), 2019, 08(02): 116-120.

目的

比较高强度超声聚焦配合清宫术与子宫动脉栓塞介入配合清宫术对于剖宫产瘢痕部位妊娠(cesarean scar pregnancies,CSP)的治疗效果。

方法

采用回顾性分析方法,纳入2014年1月至2019年1月在广州医科大学附属第三医院妇产科收治的CSP患者60例,分为观察组(高强度超声聚焦配合清宫术患者)30例与对照组(子宫动脉栓塞配合清宫术患者)30例,对比两组患者的治疗效果相关临床指标。采用t检验、χ2检验对数据进行统计分析。

结果

观察组住院时间(6.87±2.64)d,低于对照组(10±4.79)d, Z=2.21,P<0.05;观察组住院费用(15 524.47±8035.73)元,少于对照组(25 390.80±12 914.10)元,t=2.51,P<0.05;观察组月经恢复时间为(35.93±4.00)d,少于对照组(40.90±6.63)d,t=2.50,P<0.05;观察组术后疼痛发生率6.6%,低于对照组40%, χ2=8.91,P<0.05。两组患者在术中阴道出血量、术后阴道出血持续时间、术后血HCG下降时间、胃肠道反应、术后发热及盆腔感染方面差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

高强度超声聚焦配合清宫术能降低CSP患者住院时间短,住院费用低,术后恢复月经时间更短,术后疼痛的发生率更低。

Objective

To compare the therapeutic effect of high-intensity focused ultrasound with uterine curettage and uterine artery embolization with uterine curettage in cesarean scar pregnancies.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted in 60 patients with cesarean section scars, who admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2014 to January 2019. The patients were divided into observation group (high-intensity ultrasound with uterine curettage) and control group (uterine artery embolization with uterine curettage); 30 cases in each group. T test or Chi-square tests were performed for test statistical analysis.

Results

The length of hospital stay in the observation group was (6.87±2.64) days, which was lower than that of the control group (10±4.79) days, Z=2.21, P<0.05. The hospitalization expenses of the observation group (15 524.47±8035.73) was less than that of the control group (25 390.80±12 914.10) yuan, t=2.51, P<0.05. The menstrual recovery time in the observation group was (35.93±4.00) days, less than that of the control group (40.90±6.63) days, t=2.50, P<0.05. The incidence rate of postoperative pain in the observation group was 6.6%, which was lower than 40% in the control group, χ2=8.91, P<0.05. There were no significant differences in the amount of intraoperative vaginal bleeding, duration of postoperative vaginal bleeding, decline time of human chorionic gonadotropin in blood after operation, gastrointestinal reactions, postoperative fever and pelvic infection between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

High-intensity focused ultrasound with uterine curettage shorten hospitalization time, lower hospitalization costs, decrease recovery time of menstruation after surgery and reduced the incidence of post-operative pain in the patients with cesarean scar pregnancy.

图1 Ⅰ型子宫瘢痕妊娠图像。瘢痕处宫腔内孕囊存活型。孕囊大部分位于剖宫产瘢痕上方的下段宫腔内,可见胚胎及胎心搏动,绒毛下局部肌层薄,孕囊周围局部肌层血流信号丰富(黑色箭头示孕囊位置,黄色箭头示瘢痕处)
图2 Ⅱ型子宫瘢痕妊娠图像。瘢痕处肌层内孕囊型。孕囊生长于子宫前壁下段瘢痕处肌层,孕囊附着处肌层缺如或者变薄,常常胚胎结构模糊,孕囊周围局部肌层血流信号丰富(黑色箭头示孕囊位置,黄色箭头示瘢痕处)
表1 两组CSP患者一般情况指标比较(±s)
表2 两组CSP患者治疗效果比较(±s)
表3 对比两组患者术后随访资料(±s)
图3 观察组CSP患者HIFU治疗瘢痕妊娠前的超声图像。子宫瘢痕妊娠孕囊旁可见丰富血流信号(黑色箭头示孕囊位置,黄色箭头示瘢痕处)
图4 观察组CSP患者HIFU治疗瘢痕妊娠后的超声图像。瘢痕妊娠孕囊内部回声明显增强,周边模糊,孕囊周围血流信号明显减弱,且外部血流信号显著减少(黑色箭头示孕囊位置,黄色箭头示瘢痕处)
表4 对比两组CSP患者不良反应发生率[例(%)]
[1]
中华医学会妇产科学分会计划生育学组. 剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠诊治专家共识(2016)[J]. 中华妇产科杂志,2016, 51(8): 568-572.
[2]
陈建芬,高学娟,余月琴,等. 超声聚焦治疗外阴营养不良的疗效观察[J]. 中国妇幼保健,2017, 32(11): 2495-2497.
[3]
Zhang X, Li K, Xie B, et al. Effective ablation therapy of adenomyosis with ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2014, (124): 207-211
[4]
Orsi F, Monfardini L, Bonomo G, et al. Disalvatore D. Ultrasound guided high intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) ablation for uterine fibroids: Do we need the microbubbles?[J]. Int J Hyperthermia, 2015, 31(3): 233-239.
[5]
Zhang L, Zhang W, Orsi F, Chen W, et al. Ultrasound-guided high intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of gynaecological diseases: A review of safety and efficacy[J]. Int J Hyperthermia, 2015, 31(3): 280-284.
[6]
Kathrine Birch Petersen, Elise Hoffmann, Christian Rifbjerg, et al. Cesarean scar pregnancy: a systematic review of treatment studies[J]. Fertility and Sterility, 2016, 105(4): 958-967.
[7]
崔杰,许永华. 高强度聚焦超声治疗子宫腺肌病临床研究进展[J]. 介入放射学杂志,2015, 24(3): 268-272.
[8]
Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Bennett TA, et al. A new minimally invasive treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy and cervical pregnancy[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 215(3): 351-358.
[9]
Jiang J, Xue M. The treatment of cervical pregnancy with high-intensity focused ultrasound followed by suction curettage: report of three cases[J]. Int J Hyperthermia, 2019, 36(1): 273-276.
[10]
熊洁,陈锦云,王熙,等.高强度聚焦超声治疗包块型剖宫产瘢痕妊娠19例临床分析[J]. 现代妇产科进展,2016, 25(6): 448-451.
[11]
Zhu X, Deng X, Wan Y, et al. High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Combined With Suction Curettage for the Treatment of Cesarean Scar Pregnancy[J]. Medicine, 2015, 94(18): e854.
[12]
Chen J, Chen W, Zhang L, et al. Safety of ultrasound-guided ultrasound ablation for uterine fibroids and adenomyosis: a review of 9988 cases[J]. Ultrason Sonochem, 2015, (27): 671-676.
[1] 李钱梅, 何冠南, 赵婧, 陈曦, 唐玉英, 马丽琼, 梁蓉, 袁桃, 李明星. 早孕期低危妊娠和高危妊娠胎盘微血流成像特征及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(07): 726-732.
[2] 张舒沁, 陈练. 产后宫腔内妊娠物残留的诊断和临床处理[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 493-497.
[3] 刘子洋, 崔俭俭, 赵茵. 产科弥散性血管内凝血及其评分系统的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 511-518.
[4] 谢江燕, 王亚菲, 贺芳. 妊娠合并血栓性血小板减少性紫癜2例并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 556-563.
[5] 王刘欣, 郭艳霞, 陈永进, 张旻, 李强. 激光治疗应用于撕脱性损伤牙再植根面处理的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 345-350.
[6] 张静, 刘畅, 华成舸. 妊娠期患者口腔诊疗进展[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 340-344.
[7] 孙璐, 蒋亚玲, 陈凌君. 布托啡诺对脑缺血再灌注损伤大鼠神经炎症和JAK2/STAT3信号通路的影响[J/OL]. 中华细胞与干细胞杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 344-350.
[8] 公宇, 廖媛, 尚梅. 肝细胞癌TACE术后复发影响因素及预测模型建立[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 818-824.
[9] 李一帆, 朱帝文, 任伟新, 鲍应军, 顾俊鹏, 张海潇, 曹耿飞, 阿斯哈尔·哈斯木, 纪卫政. 血GP73水平在原发性肝癌TACE疗效评价中的作用[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 825-830.
[10] 吴雪云, 胡小军, 范应方. 肝切除术中剩余肝再生能力的评估与预测[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 894-897.
[11] 芦煜, 李振宇, 吴承东, 周仲伍. 肛周子宫内膜异位症一例报告[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 431-434.
[12] 张津, 李欣达, 徐如祥. 神经类器官在大脑常见疾病治疗中的应用及在脊髓损伤修复中的应用前景[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 257-263.
[13] 吴广迎, 张延娟, 秦鹏, 卢艳丽. 经颈静脉肝内门体静脉分流术预防上消化道出血的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 545-548.
[14] 耿晓坤. 缺血性卒中后无效再灌注的时间窗、组织窗与神经保护[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 636-636.
[15] 牟磊, 徐东成, 韩鑫, 徐长江, 韩坤锜, 薛叶潇, 牟媛, 秦文玲, 刘相静, 陈哲, 高楠. 五虫通络胶囊防治椎动脉开口支架术后再狭窄发生的效果[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 467-472.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?