手动负压吸引术和电动负压吸引术终止早孕的临床研究

发布时间：2018-05-13 19:23

本文选题：手动负压吸引术 + 电动负压吸引术　；参考：《天津医科大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的观察并比较手动负压吸宫术(MVA)与电动负压吸宫术(EVA)终止妊娠小于等于56天的早期妊娠的不全流产率、术中失血量、宫颈扩张、吸刮宫次数、手术时间、对受术者造成的疼痛等方面的情况,以探究MVA在终止早孕期人工流产术中的安全性、有效性及其特性,以便在临床中适当的应用。方法研究对象为早孕时间小于等于56天、有手术人工流产要求的女性492人,将研究对象随机分成观察组和对照组两个组,观察组252例,采用MVA行人工流产吸宫术(MVA组);对照组240例,采用EVA行人工流产吸宫术(EVA组)。比较两组宫腔吸出物总量、手术时间和术中受术者疼痛程度,是否需要扩张宫颈,若需扩张宫颈,记录宫颈扩张棒的号数,吸宫及刮宫次数。结果MVA组未扩宫者占94.0%,EVA组未扩宫者占3.3%,MVA组和EVA组在扩张宫颈方面比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),MVA组需扩宫者明显少于EVA组。MVA组吸宫1次者占22.2%,吸宫2次者占74.2%,吸宫3次者占3.6%,EVA组吸宫1次者占37.9%,吸宫2次者占46.7%,吸宫3次者占15.4%,MVA组和EVA组刮宫分别占47.2%和54.6%,MVA组和EVA组在吸刮宫次数方面比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。MVA组宫腔吸出物总量37.4ml,EVA组宫腔吸出物总量32.3ml,MVA组和EVA组比较宫腔吸出物总量差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。MVA组手术时间约2.7分钟,EVA组约4.7分钟,MVA组和EVA组在手术时间上比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),MVA组手术时间比EVA组要短。在没有任何麻醉的前提下,MVA组和EVA组受术者手术中感受到的疼痛比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05),MVA组术中疼痛评分比EVA组低。MVA组和EVA组术中都未发生并发症。结论对于妊娠小于等于56天的早期妊娠人工流产吸宫手术,MVA组和EVA组相比,两者有相似的有效性及安全性,且MVA具有减少扩张宫颈、手术时间相对短、减少手术造成的疼痛等优点。
[Abstract]:Objective to observe and compare the incomplete abortion rate, intraoperative blood loss, cervical dilatation, the times of curettage, and the operation time between manual negative pressure aspiration (MVA) and electric negative pressure aspiration (EVA) for termination of pregnancy less than 56 days. To explore the safety, efficacy and characteristics of MVA in the termination of early pregnancy induced abortion. Methods A total of 492 women with an early pregnancy of less than 56 days were randomly divided into two groups: the observation group and the control group. 252 cases in the observation group were divided into two groups, the control group (n = 252) and the control group (n = 252). The MVA group was treated with MVA and the control group with EVA. The total amount of uterine cavity aspiration, the time of operation, the degree of pain in operation, whether the cervix should be dilated or not, the number of cervical dilatation rod, the number of uterine suction and the number of curettage were compared between the two groups. Results there was a significant difference between the MVA group and the EVA group in the cervical dilatation between the MVA group (94.0%) and the EVA group (3.3%). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of cervical dilatation. The number of patients in the MVA group who needed to expand the uterus was significantly less than that in the EVA group (22.2c), the second time in the EVA group was 74.2%, and the third time in the EVA group. There was no significant difference in the number of curettage times between MVA group and EVA group (47.2% and 54.6%), respectively (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the number of curettage times between MVA group and EVA group (37.4 ml 路EVA group) in the area of uterine curettage, and there was no significant difference between the two groups in the number of curettage times (P0.05. MVA group), MVA group (37.4 ml) and EVA group (37.4 ml / kg) respectively, with no significant difference in the number of curettage times (P 0.05). There was no significant difference in the total amount of intrauterine aspirates between the EVA group and the EVA group. There was no significant difference in the total amount of the intrauterine aspirates between the two groups. The operation time of the EVA group was 2.7 minutes and that of the EVA group was 4.7 minutes. There was a significant difference between the MVA group and the EVA group in the operation time. There was significant difference in the operation time between the MVA group and the EVA group. The time was shorter than that in EVA group. Under the condition of no anesthesia, there was significant difference in the pain between MVA group and EVA group. The pain score of MVA group was lower than that of EVA group. MVA group and EVA group had no complications during operation. Conclusion compared with EVA group, MVA group and EVA group have similar efficacy and safety for early pregnancy induced abortion with less than 56 days gestation, and MVA can reduce cervix dilatation, and the operation time is relatively short. Reduce pain caused by surgery, etc.
【学位授予单位】：天津医科大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：R169.42

【参考文献】