三种方法治疗宫颈糜烂对比分析

目的比较分析超声聚焦、微波和高频电波环切术（LEEP刀）治疗宫颈糜烂的临床疗效。方法选择本院于2009年1月～2011年6月收治的378例宫颈糜烂患者，随机分为超声聚焦组、微波组和LEEP组。其中，轻度糜烂患者126例，分为微波组、超声聚焦组和LEEP组各42例；中度糜烂患者126例，分为微波组、超声聚焦组和LEEP组各42例；重度糜烂患者126例，分为微波组、超声聚焦组和LEEP组各42例，观察三组患者的临床疗效。结果对于轻度糜烂患者，超声聚焦组、微波组和LEEP组的治愈率分别为80．95％、78．57％、83．33％，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；对中度宫颈糜烂患者，三种治疗方法的治愈率分别为76．19％、71．43％、80．95％，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；而对重度糜烂患者，三种治疗方法的治愈率分别为50．00％、45．24％、78．57％，LEEP组明显优于超声聚焦和微波治疗组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；对于乳突型宫颈糜烂患者。LEEP组的疗效亦明显优于超声聚焦和微波治疗组。LEEP组术中出血量和阴道出血发生率多于超声聚焦和微波治疗组，而手术时间、术中出血量、阴道出血发生率、阴道流液时间超声聚焦组均优于微波组。结论对于轻中度宫颈糜烂宜选用超声聚焦治疗，LEEP刀治疗重度宫颈糜烂疗效优于超声聚焦和微波治疗。

Comparative analysis of three methods in treatment of cervical erosion

Objective To compare and analyze the clinical effect of focused ultrasound and microwave therapy and LEEP in treatment of cervical erosion.Methods Selected 378 cases with cervical erosion in our hospital from January 2009 to June 2011,they were randomly divided into focused ultrasound group,microwave group and LEEP group,126 cases of slight erosion were divided into focused ultrasound group,microwave group and LEEP group,42 cases in each group,126 cases of moderate erosion were divided into focused ultrasound group,microwave group and LEEP group,42 cases in each group,126 cases of severe erosion were divided into focused ultrasound group,microwave group and LEEP group,42 cases in each group.Observed the clinical effect of three groups.Results All of 126 cases of slight erosion,the cure rate of focused ultrasound group,microwave group and LEEP group were 80.95%,78.57%,83.33% respectively,there was no statistically significant difference between them(P > 0.05);126 cases of moderate erosion,the cure rate of three methods were 76.19%,71.43%,80.95%,there was no statistically significant difference between them(P > 0.05);126 cases of severe erosion,the cure rate of three methods were 50.00%,45.24%,78.57%,LEEP group was better than focused ultrasound group and microwave group,there was statistically significant difference(P < 0.05);And mastoid type of cervical erosion,the clinical effect of LEEP group was better than focused ultrasound group and microwave group.Intraoperative blood loss and vaginal bleeding incidence rate of LEEP group were more than focused ultrasound group and microwave group,operation time,intraoperative blood loss,vaginal bleeding incidence rate and vaginal fluid time of focused ultrasound group were better than microwave group.Conclusion The patients of slight cervical erosion and moderate cervical erosion could use focused ultrasound for treatment,and LEEP in treatment of severe cervical erosion is better than focused ultrasound and microwave therapy.