盆底重建术与传统阴式子宫切除加阴道前后壁修补术治疗子宫脱垂疗效比较

Efficacy comparison of pelvic floor reconstruction and the traditional vaginal hysterectomy plus colporrhaphia anterior-posterior in the treatment of uterine prolapsed

目的比较盆底重建术与传统阴式子宫切除加阴道前后壁修补术治疗子宫脱垂的疗效。方法选择2010年1月至2013年1月永州市第四人民医院收治的子宫脱垂患者56例，随机分为研究组和对照组。分别采用盆底重建术与传统阴式子宫切除加阴道前后壁修补术治疗，比较二者疗效。结果研究组在手术时间、术中出血量以及住院时间上均明显短（少）于对照组，研究组患者总有效率明显高于对照组，且复发率明显低于对照组，差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论盆底重建术治疗子宫脱垂具有较高的治愈率，复发率低，手术及住院时间短、出血量少，值得推广。

Objective To compae the efficacy of pelvic floor reconstruction and the traditional va- ginal hysterectomy plus colporrhaphia anterior-posterior on uterine prolapse. Methods Fifty-six patients with uterine prolapse were chose from January 2010 to January 2013, and were randomly divided into study group and control group. They were respectively treated with pelvic floor reconstruction and the traditional vaginal hysterectomy plus colporrhaphia anterior-posterior. Results The operation time, amount of bleed- ing during the operation and hospital stay in study group were significantly shorter（less） than those in con- trol group, and the total effective rate of study group was obviously higher than that of control group, and the recmTence rate was lower than that of control group, the differences were statistically significant （ P 〈 0. 05）. Conclusions Pelvic floor reconstruction in the treatment of uterine prolapse has high cure rate, low recurrence rate, it can the shorten operation and hospitalization time, and has less bleeding, so is worthy of promotion.