剖宫产术后疤痕处妊娠两种治疗方法临床探讨

目的比较剖宫产术后切口瘢痕妊娠有效的治疗方法。方法将171例子宫瘢痕妊娠患者分为两组,其中孕囊穿刺组86例和动脉栓塞组85例,比较两组治疗1周和2周后β-HCG水平,阴道出血量,住院时间,转经时间。结果治疗2周后,动脉栓塞组血β-HCG下降较孕囊穿刺组快,分别为80%和60%;治疗期间动脉栓塞组出血量明显低于孕囊穿刺组,分别为(40.32±21.37)ml和(71.27±31.12)ml,住院时间、转经时间短于孕囊穿刺组,分别为(32.8±4.6)d和(16.8±4.1)d,(41.9±4.1)d和(28.6±5.9)d,比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05或0.01)。结论 CSP的治疗最好采用个体化的方法,情况容许采用子宫动脉栓塞术的介入方法,治疗周期短,效果确切,对提高患者生活质量有利。

Effects of Gestational Sac Puncture and Artery Embolization on 41 Cases with Cesarean Scar Pregnancy

Objective To discuss the effective methods for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy.Methods One hundred and seventy one cases with cesarean scar pregnancy were divided into the gestational sac puncture group(n=86) and artery embolization group(n=85).The level of serum β-HCG,blood loss,hospitalization time and menses time were measured after the treatment of one week and two week.Results The level of serum β-HCG in artery embolization group decreased quickly as compared to the gestational sac puncture group(80% vs.60%);blood loss in artery embolization group was less than that in the gestational sac puncture group(40.32±21.37) ml vs.(71.27±31.12 ml)];the hospitalization time and menses time in the artery embolization group was less that in the gestational sac puncture group(32.8±4.6) d and(16.8±4.1) d vs.(41.9±4.1) d and(28.6±5.9) d],there was statistically significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05).Conclusion For CSP patients,the individualized methods should be selected.The artery embolization interventional can be used according to the condition of patients.This method has a short treatment cycle and an exact effect,and can improve the life quality of patients.