4种子宫切除术式的临床应用

目的:评价经腹全子宫切除术(TAH),阴式子宫切除术(TV8),腹腔镜辅助下阴式子宫切除术(LAVH)及腹腔镜下全子宫切除术(LTH)4种术式的临床应用效果.方法:回顾性分析TAH 60例,TVH 38例,LAVH 32例,LTH25例的临床资料.结果:4组患者无并发症发生,手术时间LTH组(119.24±12.3分钟)显著长于TVH组(76.67±8.86分钟)、TAH组(86.62±18.98分钟)和LAVH组(92.48 ±14.84分钟);术中出血量TAH组(158.28±50.38 ml)多于TVH组(90.72 ±60.28 ml)、LAVH组(80.89 ±16.24 ml)和LTH组(89.92 ±20.32 ml);术后排气时间TAH组(38.26 ±13.45小时)显著长于TVH组(25.72 ±2.43小时)、LAVH组(21.02±4.83小时)和LTH组(22.24±6.84小时);术后镇痛率TAH组(91.7%)显著高于TVH组(21.1%)、LAVH组(12.5%)和LTH组(24.0%).术后住院时间TAB组(9.24±0.98天)显著长于,TVH组(5.32±0.83天)、LAVH组(4.02±0.40天)和LTH组(4.24± 0.08天).结论:TVH、LAVH和LTH创伤小、患者痛苦少、术后恢复快.4种术式均为子宫切除的有效术式,各有利弊,根据患者的具体情况选择合适手术.     

经腹、经阴道、腹腔镜全子宫切除术临床对比研究

目的 探讨经腹全子宫切除术(TAH)、非脱垂子宫经阴道全子宫切除术(TVH)、腹腔镜辅助阴式全子宫切除术(LAVH)的临床特点及临床价值.方法 对上海市长宁区妇幼保健院2004年7月至2006年12月因子宫良性疾病需行子宫切除术的335例病例进行回顾性分析,其中TAH组118例、TVH组80例、LAVH137例,观察3组手术时间、术中出血情况、术后镇痛、术后病率和住院时间.结果 LAVH组手术时间[(130.6±37.7)min]分别较TVH[(78.9±27.8)min]、TAH组[(88.1±32.4)min]延长(P＜0.01),而后两者差异无统计学意义;LAVH组术后第1天血红蛋白下降[(9.3±7.6)g/L]分别显著高于TAH、TVH组(P＜0.01),后两者差异无统计学意义;TAH组术后镇痛率(63.6%)分别显著高于TVH、LAVH组(P＜0.05),后两者差异无统计学意义;住院时间TVH组[(6.4±1.8)d]与LAVH、TAH组差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).3组术后病率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 TVH术式手术时间短、出血少,兼有TAH和LAVH的优点,子宫体积小于4个孕月时可采用该术式.临床应根据不同情况选择不同的子宫切除方式以达到最佳治疗效果.     

TVH、TLH、TAH对子宫肌瘤患者性功能和卵巢功能的影响对比

目的比较阴式全子宫切除术(TVH)、腹腔镜全子宫切除术(TLH)、开腹全子宫切除术(TAH)对子宫肌瘤患者性功能和卵巢功能的影响。方法选择75例子宫肌瘤患者,随机分为三组,分别采取TVH、TLH、TAH治疗。比较三组的疗效、性功能和卵巢功能。结果 TLH组术中出血量、住院时间及排气时间均明显优于TVH组和TAH组(P 0.05);TLH组的性功能评分明显高于TVH组和TAH组(P 0.05),且TVH组明显高于TAH组(P 0.05);术后6个月,三组的血清FSH和LH水平均明显升高(P 0.05),E2水平均明显降低(P 0.05),且与TLH组和TVH组相比,TAH组变化更显著(P 0.05)。结论 TVH、TLH、TAH对子宫肌瘤患者性功能和卵巢功能均会产生一定程度的损伤,其中,TLH对患者性功能和卵巢功能的影响最小。     

TVH、TLH、TAH对子宫肌瘤患者性功能和卵巢功能的影响对比北大核心CSCD

目的比较阴式全子宫切除术(TVH)、腹腔镜全子宫切除术(TLH)、开腹全子宫切除术(TAH)对子宫肌瘤患者性功能和卵巢功能的影响。方法选择75例子宫肌瘤患者,随机分为三组,分别采取TVH、TLH、TAH治疗。比较三组的疗效、性功能和卵巢功能。结果 TLH组术中出血量、住院时间及排气时间均明显优于TVH组和TAH组(P <0.05);TLH组的性功能评分明显高于TVH组和TAH组(P <0.05),且TVH组明显高于TAH组(P <0.05);术后6个月,三组的血清FSH和LH水平均明显升高(P <0.05),E2水平均明显降低(P <0.05),且与TLH组和TVH组相比,TAH组变化更显著(P <0.05)。结论 TVH、TLH、TAH对子宫肌瘤患者性功能和卵巢功能均会产生一定程度的损伤,其中,TLH对患者性功能和卵巢功能的影响最小。     

非脱垂子宫阴式切除术临床应用价值

目的 探讨非脱垂子宫阴式切除术的临床价值.方法 2005年9月至2007年9月在中国医科大学附属盛京医院,将阴式子宫切除术(TVH)420例作为观察组,经腹子宫切除术(TAH)100例作为对照组1,观察手术时间、出血量及术后情况.结果 TVH组手术成功率为99.52%,膀胱、直肠副损伤发生率为0.002%.TVH组与TAH组比较,手术时间分别为(59.73±18.70)min,(61.21±15.97)min;出血量分别为(82.31±25.33)mL,(76.54±27.33)mL,P>0.05.术后病率、肠功能恢复时间、术后平均住院日,TVH组分别为5.5%、(31.87±5.56)h、(3.89±1.68)d;TAH组分别为19.0%、(55.45±8.97)h、(5.66±2.12)d,P均<0.05;术后阴道炎性息肉发生率,TVH组(9.33%)高于TAH组(5.00%),P<0.05.TVH组以无影响因素病例为对照组2,手术时间为(50.70±16.37)min,出血量为(71.33±25.00)mL;有影响因素各组手术时间和出血量分别为:子宫≥妊娠12周组为(66.86±18.17)min及(79.75±37.81)mL;最大肌瘤直径≥9cm组为(86.00±12.31)min及(98.00±16.73)mL;盆腔粘连组为(62.08±11.60)min及(90.00±25.02)mL;P均<0.05.而剖宫产术后组为(54.09±13.70)min及(70.68±18.64)mL;合并附件肿物组为(51.29±14.92)min及(73.23±14.69)mL;P均>0.05.结论 非脱垂子宫行阴式切除术创伤小,手术安全可靠.     

85例子宫切除术后排尿、排便和性功能的研究

目的:评价子宫切除术后患者的排尿、排便和性功能问题.方法:对85例因妇科良性疾病而行子宫切除术的患者进行前瞻性研究.根据术式不同分为经腹子宫切除术(TAH)45例和经阴道子宫切除术(TVH)40例两组,术前及术后3、6、12个月进行调查问卷,观察泌尿道、肠道功能和性功能的变化.结果:子宫切除术后3月,患者便秘、性交中阴道干涩、阴道短或狭窄、性交痛以及对性生活不满意与术前相比差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);随访至术后12月,尿急、尿失禁、近期无性生活与术前相比,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05);术后TAH组与TVH组的近期无性生活、少或无性交、性交无高潮比较,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论:从长远来看,子宫切除术可以改善患者术后生活质量,对泌尿道、肠道功能和性功能无负面影响.     

4种子宫全切术式在肥胖患者中的应用

目的:评价肥胖患者经腹子宫全切术(TAH)、经阴道子宫全切术(TVH)、腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫全切术(LAVH)和经腹腔镜下子宫全切除术(TLH)4种手术的临床效果.方法:回顾分析338例采用TAH、TVH、LAVH、TLH 4种术式行子宫切除术的手术时间、术中出血量、术后恢复情况.结果:TAH组手术时间明显长于其他3组(P均<0.01);LAVH组与TVH组、TLH组比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);TVH组与,TLH组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).TAH组术中出血量多于其他3组(P均<0.01);TVH组多于LAVH组(P<0.01).与TLH组相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),TLH组多于LAVH组(P<0.05).TAH组术后排气时间、术后前3天平均体温、术后住院时间与其他3组比较差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.01);TVH组、LAVH组及TLH组3组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05).结论:4种术式均为肥胖患者子宫全切除的有效术式,应根据患者病情、医生的技术条件及现有设备来选择适宜的方法.     

非脱垂子宫经阴道切除术130例临床分析

目的:探讨非脱垂子宫经阴道切除术(TVH)临床应用情况。方法:选择自2006年6月至2011年6月非脱垂子宫TVH130例(TVH组),与同期开展的经腹子宫切除术140例(TAH组)的临床应用情况行回顾性对比分析。结果:TVH组手术时间、术后下床活动时间、肛门排气时间、住院时间均明显短于TAH组(均P<0.05),TVH组患者术后疼痛明显轻于TAH组。TVH组共发生并发症11例(8.46%),TAH组共发生并发症10例(7.14%),两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。TVH组术后发生出血与脏器损伤5例(3.84%),明显高于TAH组(1例术后出血,0.71%),两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:TVH具有疼痛轻、恢复快、住院时间短等优点。TVH、TAH两组并发症总发生率无明显差别,但TVH发生脏器损伤及术后出血的概率较TAH高,其与患者的选择及术者的经验有关,应高度重视,认真防范。     

不同术式大子宫全切除术临床效果分析

目的 评价大子宫经腹全子宫切除(TAH),经阴道全子宫切除术(TVH),腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除(LAVH)以及全腹腔镜下子宫切除(TLH)4种术式的临床效果.方法 对解放军260医院2002年1月至2007年6月246例患者采用4种术式切除大子宫的手术时间、术中出血量、术后恢复情况进行回顾性分析.结果 手术时间TAH组[(101±24)min]短于TVH组[(132±25)min]、LAVH组[(111±21)min]及TLH组[(120±22)min](P＜0.01、P＜0.05);TVH组手术时间长于2种腹腔镜组(P＜0.01、P＜0.05),2种腹腔镜组手术时间相比TLH长于LAVH组(P＜0.01).术中出血量TAH组[(148±66)mL]多于TVH组[(125±70)mL]、LAVH组[(110+65)mL]及TLH组[(122±66)mL](P均＜0.05);TVH组、LAVH组、TLH组间相比差异无统计学意义(P均＞0.05).4组术后情况相比,排气时间TAH组[(41±16)h]长于TVH组[(25±6)h]、LAVH组[(23±5)h] 及TLH组[(24±7)h](P均＜0.01);TVH组排气时间长于LAVH组(P＜0.05),但与TLH组相比差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);2种腹腔镜组相比无差异(P均＞0.05).术后住院时间TAH组[(6.5 ±0.8)d]长于TVH组[(3.6±0.5)d]、LAVH组[(3.7±0.4)d]及TLH组[(3.5±0.7)d](P均＜0.01);TVH组、LAVH组及THL组间相比差异均无统计学意义(P均＞0.05).结论 4种术式均为大子宫切除的有效术式,且各有利弊;应根据患者的具体情况,术者的技术状况选择适宜术式.     

改良式经阴道非脱垂子宫切除术92例临床效果观察

目的探讨经阴道非脱垂子宫切除术(TVH)的术式改进及临床效果.方法回顾性分析92例改良TVH术式患者的术中、术后情况,并与腹腔镜辅助下阴式子宫切除术(LAVH)患者比较.结果平均手术时间改良TVH组51±18分钟,LAVH组98±27分钟;术后肛门排气时间改良TVH组18±5小时,LAVH组23±6小时;术后疼痛改良TVH组14例(30.45%),LAVH组21例(55.26%);住院时间改良TVH组5±1天、LAVH组6±2天,差异均有显著性(P＜0.05).术中出血量、术后病率改良TVH组与LAVH组比较,差异均无显著性(P＞0.05).结论在一定适应证下,改良式经阴道非脱垂子宫切除术较腹腔镜辅助下阴式子宫切除术具有手术时间短,术后疼痛轻,肠功能恢复快,体表不留瘢痕,住院时间短等优点,是值得推广的手术方式.     

不同途径子宫全切除术的临床效果比较

目的探讨4种不同途径子宫全切除术的临床效果。方法回顾性分析756例子宫全切除术患者的临床资料,其中行传统腹式子宫全切除术(TAH)260例(TAH组)、改良腹式小切口子宫全切除术(MAH)180例(MAH组)、阴式子宫全切除术(TVH)106例(TVH组)、腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫全切除术(LAVH)210例(LAVH组),比较各组患者术中及术后的情况。结果平均手术时间TAH组为(98±23)min、MAH组为(67±18)min、TVH组为(63±19)min、LAVH组为(99±35)min,TAH、LAVH组平均手术时间与MAH、TVH组比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0·05);术中平均出血量TAH组为(180±49)ml,显著多于MAH组的(102±43)ml、TVH组的(93±31)ml和LAVH组的(111±39)ml,差异有统计学意义(P<0·05);术后使用抗生素时间和肛门排气时间TAH组为(5·2±2·6)d,(36±9)h;MAH组为(3·3±1·7)d,(23±7)h;TVH组为(3·2±1·6)d,(21±4)h;LAVH组为(3·5±1·9)d,(23±6)h;TAH组与其他3组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0·05);术后体温升高的发生率TAH组也显著高于其他3组;术后平均住院时间TAH组为(5·4±2·3)d,MAH组为(5·6±1·9)d,均显著长于TVH组的(3·3±1·2)d和LAVH组的(3·6±1·1)d,差异有统计学意义(P<0·05);但平均治疗费用比较,LAVH组显著高于其他3组,差异有统计学意义(P<0·05)。结论不同途径子宫全切除术各有优势,且互不能完全替代,应根据患者的情况、手术医生的技术水平、医院的条件等综合考虑。     

Observational comparison of abdominal, vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy as performed at a university teaching hospital

OBJECTIVE: To compare short-term outcomes of total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) to total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH) and laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) regarding operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain, recovery milestones, complication rates, hospital stay, hospital costs and patient satisfaction. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, observational study examined the above criteria for 177 women with the following distribution of hysterectomy type: TAH (n = 50, 28%), TVH (n = 76, 43%) and LH (n = 51, 29%). RESULTS: Operative time was shortest for TVH (103 minutes), followed by TAH (127 minutes), and longest for LH (157 minutes) (p = 0.000). Blood loss was significantly higher in the TAH groups as compared to the TVH and LH groups. Pain estimates and analgesia requirements were significantly lower for the LH and TVH groups as compared to the TAH group. Recovery milestones were met significantly earlier in the TVH and LH groups. Complication rates did not differ significantly between the groups. Hospital stay was significantly longer for the TAH group (3.7 days) than for the TVH (1.9 days) and LH (1.5 days) groups. Hospital costs were significantly lower for the TVH groups as compared to TAH and LH groups. No significant cost difference was seen between TAH and LH. Satisfaction rates did not differ significantly between the groups though a greater percentage of patients in the LH group reported high satisfaction as compared to the other groups. CONCLUSION: Vaginal hysterectomy remains the most cost-effective approach; laparoscopy's role may be best suited to allowing conversion of laparotomy cases to a vaginal approach with assistance of a laparoscope.     

Gasless laparoscopic hysterectomy: a comparative study with total abdominal hysterectomy

AIM: To evaluate the short-term results of gasless laparoscopic hysterectomy (GLH) compared to total abdominal hysterectomy. METHODS: A comparative study of GLH using an abdominal wall-lifting device (n = 31) and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) (n = 31) was carried out between July 1999 and July 2001. RESULTS: One patient (3.2%) in the GLH group required conversion to TAH. The operative time was 168 +/- 38 min and 112 +/- 29 min (P < 0.001) for the GLH and TAH groups, respectively. Gasless laparoscopic hysterectomy cases had a shorter hospital stay and convalescent period (2.6 +/- 0.9 days vs 5.0 +/- 1.3 days, P < 0.001 and 8.0 +/- 3.0 days vs 15.8 +/- 2.4 days, P < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative meperidine use and estimated blood loss were lower for GLH (P < 0.001). Complications were comparable in the two groups. Hospital charges were 8.5% higher for GLH (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Gasless laparoscopic hysterectomy may be an alternative technique for hysterectomy which provides laparoscopic benefit with minimal increase in hospital charges.     

A comparison of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and total abdominal hysterectomy outcomes

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare operative and postoperative results of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSH) and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). DESIGN: Cohort retrospective analysis of consecutive patients (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). SETTING: Department of gynecology at a metropolitan medical center. PATIENTS: Two hundred-twenty women who underwent LSH with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). Two hundred-twenty women who underwent TAH with or without BSO. Both groups had similar surgical indications and final pathology. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Women who underwent LSH had a shorter operating time than those in the TAH group (47.7 +/- 14.6 min vs 74.9 +/- 25.6 min). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LSH group, and those patients returned to work sooner. The operative complication rate was higher in the TAH group (2.7% vs 0.9%). Postoperative complication rate for the TAH group was higher than the LSH group (25% vs zero). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is a safe and effective surgical treatment for patients in need of a hysterectomy with or without BSO. The procedure can be performed in an outpatient setting. Patients experience a much quicker recovery than those who undergo TAH, and the complication rate is significantly lower.     

Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy vs. abdominal hysterectomy in a community hospital. A cost comparison.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility for an institution to offer laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy as a cost-effective alternative to total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) in a managed care environment. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study in which 138 consecutive laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomies performed between December 1992 and May 1996 were reviewed and compared to 354 consecutive TAHs performed during the same period. Operating time, use of operative room supplies, length of stay and actual total, fixed and variable costs of each case were calculated for the entire hospital stay and for each hospital cost center. Differences between costs were analyzed by ANCOVA using age, patient weight, specimen weight and number of operative procedures performed at the time of hysterectomy as covariants. RESULTS: The mean operative room time was significantly greater for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy than for TAH (167.4 [SD 51.2] vs. 103 minutes [30.3, P < .001]). In contrast, length of stay was significantly shorter for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy than for TAH (0.8 [SD 1.1] vs. 3.4 days [.9, P < .001]). The adjusted mean costs of both operative room time and supplies were significantly higher for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy than for TAH (P < .001). In contrast, the mean cost of length of stay for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy was significantly lower (P < .001). However, the adjusted mean total costs of the entire hospital stay were not significantly different: $2,716 for laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy vs. $2,702 for TAH (F = .7, P = .8). The absence of significant differences between procedures resulted from our limited use of disposable supplies (no automated stapling device) and from shorter lengths of stay, which compensated well for the higher operative room costs of time and supplies incurred with laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is, at least in the short term, a cost-effective alternative to TAH in a managed care environment.     

Laparoscopic hysterectomy: the Kaiser Permanente San Diego experience

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient and surgical characteristics of laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH), including both total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSH), compared with total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH). DESIGN: Retrospective, comparative study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: Health maintenance organization/residency-training program. PATIENTS: One hundred eight patients who underwent TLH, 251 patients who underwent LSH, and 255 patients who underwent TAH. There was no randomized controlled system to assign patients to the three types of hysterectomy. Patients with ancillary procedures were excluded from all three groups. The study period included February 2000 through September 2002. INTERVENTION: Hysterectomy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Analysis of covariance revealed that laparoscopic procedures require significantly more time to complete than TAH. Adjusted differences were 46.4 minutes longer for TLH (p <.0001) and 38.3 minutes longer for LSH (p <.0001). The adjusted estimated blood loss was 91.0 mL less with TLH (p <.0001) and 72.6 mL less with LSH (p < .0001) than with TAH. The hospital lengths of stay were significantly shorter for LH compared with TAH. The adjusted differences were 41.7 hours less with TLH (p <.0001) and 45.1 hours less with LSH (p <.0001). Rates of major complications were 5.6% with TLH, 0.8% with LSH, and 8.2% with TAH. Rates of minor complications were 17.6% with TLH, 16.7% with LSH, and 14.1% with TAH. Rates of any complication were 21.3% with TLH, 17.1% with LSH, and 20.8% with TAH. (Note: some patients in each group had both a minor and a major complication, so that minor and major complications do not exactly add up to "any complication.") The readmission rates for TLH, LSH, and TAH were 5.6%, 1.2%, and 2.0%, respectively. Same-day discharge for TLH and LSH occurred in 16.7% and 25.1% of patients, respectively. The variables indicating minor complications, any complications, wound infections, urinary tract infections, readmissions, and same-day discharges (in the laparoscopic groups) were not differentiated by surgery type. Major complications were differentiated by procedure class; namely, total hysterectomy (TLH and TAH) had significantly more major complications than LSH (adjusted p = .001). Wound abscesses (16 patients) occurred only in the TAH group (adjusted p <.0001). Pelvic cellulitis (17 patients) occurred in all surgical groups, but was more likely to occur in the LH groups (adjusted p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic hysterectomy, both total and supracervical, can be successfully integrated into a large health maintenance organization/residency-training program. Laparoscopic hysterectomy took significantly longer to perform than TAH in this new program. Estimated blood loss was significantly less with LH than with TAH. Hospital length of stay was significantly less with LH than TAH. Major complications with TLH, minor complications with LH, overall complications, wound infections, urinary tract infections, and readmissions appear comparable with these parameters in TAH within the limits of our study size and design. Pelvic cellulitis was significantly more common with LH, and wound abscess was significantly more common with TAH. Major complications were significantly less common with LSH compared with combined TLH and TAH. Same-day discharge after LH seems to be an attractive option worth developing further. Our patients have enthusiastically accepted these new minimally invasive techniques for performing hysterectomy. We anticipate continued expansion of our LH program.     

1270例经阴道全子宫切除术的临床分析

目的：探讨经阴道全子宫切除术临床应用情况。方法：回顾性分析本院1779例全子宫切除患者的临床资料。结果：1999年以前所有全子宫切除病例均首选经腹手术,经阴道手术占2．1%,1999年以后经阴道手术占87．4%。最高年为94．5%,尤其引入Ligasure系统后经阴道手术视野明显扩大,经阴道手术副反应(10．2%)比经腹手术(41．7%)明显减少,出血量少。结论：经阴道手术损伤小、副反应小,掌握好适应证,可作为全子宫切除手术治疗的首选方法。借助适当的工具可扩大经阴道手术指征。     

阴式与腹腔镜子宫全切除术的临床效果比较

目的比较阴式子宫全切除术和腹腔镜子宫全切除术的临床效果。方法收集我院2002年1月至2004年6月接受以上不同途径子宫切除术的病例共301例的临床资料,其中阴式子宫全切除术197例(阴式组),腹腔镜子宫全切除术104例(腹腔镜组),比较两组疾病种类、手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、医疗费用及术后恢复情况等。结果(1)疾病种类:宫颈非典型增生阴式组19例、腹腔镜组3例;子宫腺肌病、合并附件疾病或盆腔子宫内膜异位症,阴式组分别为58例、9例、8例,腹腔镜组分别为45例、33例、13例;(2)手术时间:阴式组(76±28)min、腹腔镜组(139±52)min;(3)术中出血量:阴式组(170±125)ml、腹腔镜组(206±153)ml;(4)肌瘤或腺肌瘤最大直径:阴式组(49±17)mm、腹腔镜组(57±22)mm;(5)手术费用:阴式组(1073±203)元、腹腔镜组(1526±676)元。以上各指标两组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0·05);(6)住院时间:阴式组(5·6±1·2)d、腹腔镜组(5·7±2·4)d;(7)子宫重量:阴式组(235±115)g、腹腔镜组(256±158)g;(8)手术并发症发生率:阴式组为2·54%、腹腔镜组为2·88%。住院时间、切除子宫重量及手术并发症发生率等两组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0·05)。结论无明显盆腔粘连和附件疾病的子宫全切除术可选择阴式途径,子宫大小并非选择术式的决定因素。     

A study of non-closure of the peritoneum at vaginal hysterectomy

The aim of this case-controlled study was to determine whether non-closure of the peritoneum is detrimental in vaginal hysterectomy. 233 patients who underwent total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH) or laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) at the University of Vienna/Austria were analyzed. Cohorts of patients were formed according to their peritonealization status (open, n=117, vs closed peritoneum, n=116) and further stratified according to the type of surgical procedure: simple TVH ( n=115), TVH with concurrent vaginal repair and/or urinary incontinence surgery ( n=91) and LAVH ( n=27). No significant differences could be observed in analyzed surgical outcome (operation time, blood loss and analgesia). Complications (fever, infection, hemorrhage or revision) were similar whether the peritoneum was closed or not. After simple TVH, resumption of bowel function took place earlier in patients with open peritoneum than in those where it had been sutured (1.9 vs 2.4 days, P=0.001). No readmission for prolapse of the vaginal vault was recorded. Non-closure of the peritoneum at vaginal hysterectomy appears to be safe. Omission of peritoneal closure reduces the potential risk of injury and has a beneficial effect on bowel function.