四孔法腹腔镜与传统开腹子宫切除术的临床效果对比分析

Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Effect of Four-hole Method of Laparoscopic and Conventional Abdominal Hysterectomy

目的探讨基层医院开展四孔法腹腔镜下子宫切除术的有效性和安全性。方法回顾性分析我院四孔法腹腔镜下子宫切除术和开腹子宫切除术治疗子宫肌瘤或子宫腺肌病的临床资料，分析比较腹腔镜子宫切除术（A组，50例）和传统开腹子宫切除术（B组，50例）的手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症、肛门排气时间、术后住院时间和平均住院费用等指标。结果A组手术时间高于B组，但差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）；A组术中出血量、术后并发症、肛门排气时间和术后住院时间明显少于B组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；平均住院费用A组高于B组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论四孔法腹腔镜下子宫切除术具有良好的有效性和安全性，是基层医院值得开展的妇科手术方式。

Objective Comparative analysis of laparoseopic hysterectomy four-hole method and the traditional abdominal hysterectomy in clinical effects.Method Retrospective analysis of two kinds of surgical method in our hospital clinical information will be 100 cases of uterine resection were divided into laparoscopic hysterectomy （A group = 50 eases） and traditional abdominal hysterectomy （B group = 50 cases）, analysis and comparison of two surgical operation time, blood loss, postoperative complications, anal exhaust time, postoperative length of stay and average hospital costs.Result A group of operative time was higher than the B group, but the difference was not statistically significant （P〉0.05）; A group of blood loss, postoperative complications, anal exhaust time and postoperative hospital stay was less than B group, the difference was statistically significant （P〈0.05）; the average hospitalization cost of A group was higher than B group, the difference was statistically significant （F〈0.05）.Conclusion Four-hole laparoscopic hysterectomy with less trauma, less bleeding, less post-operative complications, the average length of stay is short, patients recover quickly, ere., is the ideal hysterectomy surgery.