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]. 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]. 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] 杨水华, 何桂丹, 覃桂灿, 梁蒙凤, 罗艳合, 李雪芹, 唐娟松. 胎儿孤立性完全型肺静脉异位引流的超声心动图特征及高分辨率血流联合时间-空间相关成像的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1061-1067.
[2] 张宝富, 俞劲, 叶菁菁, 俞建根, 马晓辉, 刘喜旺. 先天性原发隔异位型肺静脉异位引流的超声心动图诊断[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1074-1080.
[3] 刘林峰, 王增涛, 王云鹏, 钟硕, 郝丽文, 仇申强, 陈超. 足底内侧皮瓣联合甲骨皮瓣在手指V度缺损再造中的临床应用[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 480-484.
[4] 仇申强, 王增涛, 郝丽文, 陈超, 刘林峰, 张迪. 拇手指全形再造二期整形的效果观察[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 485-490.
[5] 李硕, 尹希, 祁连港, 王丽, 刘宗宝. 浓缩生长因子在促进失神经皮瓣术后神经再生的应用前景[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 547-551.
[6] 宫镇江, 王守一, 姚超, 庞永志, 崔婧. sticky bone混合浓缩生长因子应用于水平骨增量患者的临床效果研究[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 430-435.
[7] 叶晓琳, 刘云飞, 庞明泉, 王海久, 任利, 侯立朝, 于文昊, 王志鑫, 樊海宁. 肝再生细胞来源及调控机制的研究进展[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 96-99.
[8] 吴少峰, 张轶男, 孙杰. 机器人辅助手术在儿童微创泌尿手术中的应用和展望[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 440-444.
[9] 钟文文, 李科, 刘碧好, 蔡炳, 脱颖, 叶雷, 马波, 瞿虎, 汪中扬, 王德娟, 邱剑光. 不同比例聚乳酸/丝素蛋白复合支架在兔尿道缺损修复中的疗效[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 516-522.
[10] 崔佳琪, 吴迪, 陈海艳, 周惠敏, 顾元龙, 周光文, 杨军. TACE术后并发肝脓肿的临床诊治分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 688-693.
[11] 郭晓磊, 李晓云, 孙嘉怿, 金乐, 郭亚娟, 史新立. 含生长因子骨移植材料的研究进展和监管现状[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(06): 373-378.
[12] 张郁妍, 胡滨, 张伟红, 徐楣, 朱慧, 羊馨玥, 刘海玲. 妊娠中期心血管超声参数与肝功能的相关性及对不良妊娠结局的预测价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 499-504.
[13] 符梅沙, 周玉华, 李慧, 薛春颜. 淋巴细胞免疫治疗对复发性流产患者外周血T淋巴细胞亚群分布与PD1/PD-L1表达的影响及意义[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 726-730.
[14] 张敏洁, 张小杉, 段莎莎, 施依璐, 赵捷, 白天昊, 王雅晳. 氢气治疗心肌缺血再灌注损伤的作用机制及展望[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 744-748.
[15] 王丁然, 迟洪滨. 自身免疫甲状腺炎对子宫内膜异位症患者胚胎移植结局的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 682-688.
阅读次数
全文


摘要