高频环形电切与冷刀锥切治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ的疗效对比研究

Effect Comparison between LEEP and CKC for Treatment of CIN Ⅲ

目的:探讨高频环形电切与冷刀锥切治疗宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ的疗效。方法:回顾性分析2011年6月至2013年10月我院经阴道镜活检确诊为宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ的患者154例,按采取的手术方式分为两组,其中75例行高频环形电切术治疗(研究组),79例行冷刀锥切术治疗(对照组),比较两组患者的临床疗效、病理和并发症。结果:两组患者术后治疗效果相当,在治愈率、残留率及复发率方面,均无显著性差异(P>0.05);但研究组手术时间、住院时间、愈合时间、术中出血量、病灶切除深度及治疗费用均显著低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。在术后并发症方面,研究组并发症发生率为8.00%,显著低于对照组的20.25%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);研究组阴道镜活检与治疗后病理一致率为77.33%,对照组为79.75%,两组患者治疗前后病理比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:高频环形电切术是诊治宫颈上皮内瘤变Ⅲ患者的有效方法,与冷刀锥切术比较,能够缩短手术时间、住院时间及愈合时间,具有术中出血量少、病灶切除深度小、治疗费用低及并发症少的优点。

Objective： To discuss the clinical effect of LEEP and CKC for treatment of CIN Ⅲ. Methods： From June 2011 to October 2013,the clinical data of 154 patients diagnosed as CIN Ⅲ by multiple punch biopsy under colposcope were retrospectively analyzed,including 75 LEEP （research group） and 79 CKC （control group） according to the operation ways. And the clinical efficacy, pathology and complications of the two groups of patients were compared. Results： The two groups had the same values in treatment effect. There were no significant differences in cure rate, residual rate and recurrence rate （P〉0.05）. However, the operation time, hospitalization time, healing time, intraoperative blood loss, the depth of the lesion resection and cost of treatment of research group were significantly lower than that of the control group （P〈0.05）. In the aspect of complications, the incidence of complications of research group was 8.00%, significantly less than 20.25% of the control group（P〈0.05）. The consistent rate of colposcopy biopsy and pathological was 77.33% in research group,and 79.75% in control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups （P〉0.05）. Conclusion： LEEP is an effective treating method to CIN Ⅲ. Compared with CKC, LEEP can shorten the operation time, hospitalization time and the healing time, with less intraoperative blood loss, depth of the lesion resection of small, low treatment cost and less complications.