两种方法治疗宫颈糜烂的临床观察

Clinical observation of two treatment to cervical erosion

目的讨论微波、环形电切术（LEEP）治疗宫颈糜烂的临床疗效，指导临床正确选择治疗宫颈糜烂的方法。方法将2005年5月至2007年5月于笔者所在医院妇产科门诊因宫颈糜烂要求治疗的患者140例随机分为微波组和LEEP组，分别用微波和LEEP治疗，对两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后阴道排液时间、术后12周末宫颈糜烂治愈率进行比较。结果手术时间、术中出血量LEEP组均大于微波组（P〈0．05），阴道排液时间LEEP组明显短于微波组（P〈0．05）。轻度宫颈糜烂术后12周末一次治愈率两组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05），而中重度宫颈糜烂术后12周末一次治愈率微波组低于LEEP组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论两种治疗方法各有优缺点，临床应根据不同患者选择不同的治疗方案。

Objective To discuss the microwave, loop electrosurgical excision procedure （LEEP） the treatment of cervical erosion of clinical efficacy. The right choice to guide the clinical treatment of cervical erosion method. Methods May 2005 - May ：2007 in our hospital because of obstetrics and gynecology out - patient treatment of cervical erosion requirements of 140 cases of patients were randomly divided into the microwave and LEEP group, respectively, with microwave and LEEP treatment for two groups of surgical time, bleeding volume, vaginal discharge after time, after 12 over the weekend to compare the cure rate of cervical erosion. Results The operative time, bleeding volume LEEP group than microwave group （ P 〈 0. 05 ） , vaginal discharge time LEEP group was significantly shorter than the microwave group （ P 〈 0.05 ）. Mild cervical erosion over the weekend after a cure rate of 12 difference between the two groups was not significant （ P 〉 0.05 ）, and moderate to severe cervical erosion over the weekend after a cure rate of 12 microwave LEEP group than in groups, the differences were significance （ P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion Both methods have advantages and disadvantages of the treatment of clinical patients should choose a different according to different treatment options.