腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗输卵管妊娠致腹腔内大出血的效果比较
苏丽芬1 洪 宇2▲
1.广东省普宁市妇幼保健院妇科,广东普宁 515300;2.澳门镜湖医院妇科,澳门 999078
[摘要]目的比较腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗输卵管妊娠致腹腔内大出血的效果。方法回顾性分析2000年1月~2015年10月104例在普宁市妇幼保健院妇科住院、因输卵管妊娠致腹腔内大出血行手术治疗的患者的临床资料,其中66例行腹腔镜手术,38例行开腹手术,比较两组患者的治疗效果。结果腹腔镜组患者中原有3例因盆腔严重粘连、出血凶猛而中转开腹,其余均在腹腔镜下顺利完成,成功率为95.7%;两组均取得很好的临床疗效,无一例术中、术后并发症发生;与开腹组患者比较,腹腔镜组患者盆腹腔积血量明显较少,且手术时间明显较短(P均<0.05),在术中出血量、输血量方面,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05);腹腔镜组患者术后肛门排气时间、术后首次下床时间均短于开腹组(P均<0.05);两组出院时血红蛋白水平、住院天数比较差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。结论与开腹手术比较,腹腔镜手术对腹腔内大出血的输卵管妊娠患者具有快速止血、手术时间短等优势,值得临床推广。
[关键词]输卵管妊娠;腹腔出血;腹腔镜手术;开腹手术
异位妊娠是可危及生命的妇科常见病,其发生率为所有妊娠的1.3%~2%,以输卵管妊娠为主[1]。尽管近年来该病导致的死亡率明显降低,但仍占妊娠相关死亡总数的9%~13%[2-3]。腹腔镜术因其创伤小、失血少、术时短、恢复快等优势,已逐渐取代传统开腹手术,成为诊治异位妊娠的金标准。但对于异位妊娠病灶已发生破裂,腹腔内大出血的患者来说,腹腔内的出血量与患者的血流动力状态是衡量采用腹腔镜或开腹手术的重要标准。既往有学者报道腹腔镜手术对此类患者的可行性[4-7],但纳入的患者数量较少,本研究拟采用病例对照研究方法比较腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗输卵管妊娠致腹腔内大出血、血流动力学不稳定患者的效果。
1 资料与方法
1.1 一般资料
2000年1月~2015年10月在普宁市妇幼保健院妇科住院治疗的输卵管妊娠患者共1125例,其中578例患者接受手术治疗。选取行腹腔镜或开腹手术治疗、临床资料完整且符合以下标准的患者为研究对象:①术前患者生命体征和血红蛋白检测提示有血流动力学不稳定;②行患侧输卵管切除术;③经手术及病理检查证实为输卵管妊娠;④术中测量盆腹腔积血量≥800 m1。共有104例患者符合入选标准,按手术方式将患者分为腹腔镜组(66例)和开腹组(38例)。两组患者在年龄[(26.2±3.7)岁vs (28.5±4.3)岁]、孕次[(2.7±1.6)次vs (2.5±1.7)次]、产次[(1.8±1.4)次vs (1.6±1.4)次]、BMI[(24.3±5.8)kg/m2vs (24.8±5.5)kg/m2]、妊娠周数[(6.9±1.6)周vs (7.3±1.7)周]和盆腹腔手术史(10例vs 7例)等方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05),具有可比性。
两组患者术前的血流动力学指标:收缩压[(95.6± 16.8)mmHg vs (97.7±13.5)mmHg]、舒张压[(64.1± 8.3)mmHg vs (64.6±8.1)mmHg]、心率[(100.6±6.4)/min vs (103.7±7.8)/min]、血红蛋白[(96.3±10.9)g/L vs (98.7± 14.3)g/L]及初诊至手术的时间间隔[(137.6±39.5)min vs (145.8±42.1)min]方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。
1.2 手术方法
开腹组:全身麻醉,患者取平卧位,逐层切开腹壁组织进入腹腔,寻找、暴露患侧输卵管,吸净盆腔内积血,根据不同情况行输卵管切除术或切开取胚术或妊娠物挤出术,冲洗盆腹腔,止血,逐层关腹。
腹腔镜组:全身麻醉,患者取平卧、头低臀高位,气腹针穿刺气孔,形成CO2气腹,置入10 mm Trocar,使气腹压力维持在13 mmHg,将腹腔镜从Trocar中插入。然后于左右麦氏点处取小切口,并置入2个Trocar,先吸出腹腔和盆腔中残留的积血,暴露患侧输卵管,对盆腔和腹腔进行细致探查,根据不同情况行输卵管切除术或切开取胚术或妊娠物挤出术。通过Trocar将切除物取出,冲洗盆腹腔,止血,排出气体,缝合切口。
两组患者术后均应用抗生素抗感染,若有血象高、发热等情况,可延长应用时间。
1.3 观察指标
观察比较两组术中相关指标(盆腹腔积血量、术中出血量、手术时间、输血量)和术后相关指标(肛门排气时间、术后首次下床活动时间、出院时血红蛋白、住院天数和术后并发症)。
1.4 统计学方法
采用SPSS 13.0统计软件对数据进行分析,计量资料以均数±标准差(±s)表示,采用t检验,以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。
2 结果
腹腔镜组患者中原有3例因盆腔严重粘连、出血凶猛而中转开腹,其余均在腹腔镜下顺利完成,成功率为95.7%。开腹组和腹腔镜组均取得很好的临床疗效,无一例术中、术后并发症发生。
2.1 两组患者术中相关指标的比较
与开腹组患者比较,腹腔镜组患者盆腹腔积血量明显较少,且手术时间明显较短(P均<0.05);在术中出血量、输血量方面,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)(表1)。
表1 两组患者术中相关指标的比较(±s)

2.2 两组患者术后相关指标的比较
腹腔镜组患者术后肛门排气时间、术后首次下床活动时间均短于开腹组(P均<0.05);两组患者出院时血红蛋白水平、住院天数比较,差异无统计学意义(P均>0.05)(表2)。
表2 两组患者术后相关指标的比较(±s)

3 讨论
腹腔镜术是破裂型异位妊娠的常用治疗方法,但并不适用于所有患者,既往观点认为,对于输卵管间质部妊娠、宫角妊娠、肥胖、盆腔严重粘连患者来说,尤其是伴有血流动力学状态不稳定的患者,腹腔镜手术难度大、时间长,被列为禁忌证[8-9]。近年来随着腹腔镜器械的更新升级和临床医师微创手术技术的提高,上述禁忌证已逐渐成为相对禁忌。据报道[10],有多达15%的异位妊娠患者可能经历低血容量性休克,但由于缺乏大样本的临床数据,腹腔镜手术对快速止血的作用目前尚存在争议。有研究[11]提示,对于同时伴有血流动力学不稳定的异位妊娠患者来说,腹腔镜手术时可能发生以下病理、生理效应,应加以权衡。①对患者有利:头低脚高体位可增加心脏回流血量,腹腔因气腹压力增加可压迫血管壁,在一定程度上限制病灶进行性出血;②对患者不利:气腹会减少下肢静脉回流和回心血量,从而减少心排血量。
既往已有较多学者证实,针对血流动力学不稳定的异位妊娠患者,施行腹腔镜手术的成功率高达90.9%~94.5%,仅有不到10%患者需要中转开腹,且术后并发症发生率等与开腹患者比较,差异无统计学意义[4-5]。最近一项前瞻性研究[12]提示,腹腔镜手术治疗腹腔内出血量>800 m1的异位妊娠患者时,有自信的术者和富有手术经验的术者成功率分别为70%和100%。本研究期间,腹腔镜组患者中有3例因盆腔严重粘连、出血凶猛而中转开腹,其余均在腹腔镜下顺利完成,成功率为95.7%,与上述研究结果相似,说明腹腔镜手术的可行性。其是否优于传统开腹手术?本研究提示,腹腔镜组和开腹组患者术前的血流动力学指标(收缩压、舒张压、心率、血红蛋白)及初诊至手术的时间间隔方面比较,差异无统计学意义,但与开腹组患者比较,腹腔镜组患者术毕时盆腹腔积血量明显较少,其与腹腔镜手术进入腹腔快(节约了开腹的时间),视野更清晰,手术时间明显缩短有关,且手术过程中气腹压迫血管壁,控制出血量,从而减少患者的总体失血量[13-14]
综上所述,与传统开腹手术比较,腹腔镜手术对腹腔内大出血的输卵管妊娠患者具有快速止血、手术时间短等优势,临床医生可通过提高腹腔镜操作技巧以提升手术效果。但对盆腹腔严重粘连等手术困难患者术式选择应慎重,切勿勉强施行腹腔镜,以免延误抢救时机,得不偿失[15]
[参考文献]
[1]Saraiya M,Berg CJ,Shu1man H,et al.Estimates of the annua1 number of c1inica11y recognized pregnancies in the United States,1981-1991[J].Am J Epidemio1,1999,149 (11):1025-1029.
[2]Goyaux N,Leke R,Keita N,etal.Ectopic pregnancy in African deve1oping countries[J].Acta Obstet Gyneco1 Scand,2003,82(4):305-312.
[3]Epee-Bekima M,Overton C.Diagnosis and treatment of ectopic pregnancy[J].Practitioner,2013,257(1759):15-17.
[4]慕建宁,王静,邵莹,等.休克型异位妊娠腹腔镜手术治疗临床分析[J].中国妇幼保健,2012,27(8):1146-1147.
[5]Sagiv R,Debby A,Sadan O,et al.Laparoscopic surgery for extrauterine pregnancy in hemodynamica11y unstab1e patients[J].J Am Assoc Gyneco1 Laparosc,2001,8(4):529-532.
[6]Cengiz H,Kaya C,Ekin M,et al.Is 1aparoscopic surgery safe in patients with an e1evated shock index due to ruptured ectopic pregnancy?[J].C1in Exp Obstet Gyneco1,2013,40(3):418-420.
[7]龙洋,刘阳,马健.腹腔镜手术与开腹手术治疗输卵管妊娠疗效比较评价与进展性研究[J].中华妇产科杂志,2013,48(3):151-153.
[8]陈雪梅.异位妊娠大出血的腹腔镜手术处理[J].中外医疗,2012,31(21):20-21.
[9]D’Hooghe T,Tomassetti C.Surgery for ectopic pregnancy:making the right choice[J].Lancet,2014,383(9927):1444-1445.
[10]MacRae R,O1owu O,Rizzuto MI,et al.Diagnosis and 1aparoscopic management of 11 consecutive cases of cornua1 ectopic pregnancy[J].Arch Gyneco1 Obstet,2009,280 (1):59-64.
[11]Tu1andi T,Kab1i N.Laparoscopy in patients with b1eeding ectopic pregnancy[J].J Obstet Gynaeco1 Can,2006,28(5):361-365.
[12]Odejinmi F,Sangrithi M,O1owu O.Operative 1aparoscopy as the mainstay method in management of hemodynamica11y unstab1e patients with ectopic pregnancy[J].J Minim Invasive Gyneco1,2011,18(2):179-183.
[13]Berretta R,Da11’Asta A,Merisio C,et al.Tuba1 ectopic pregnancy:our experience from 2000 to 2013[J].Acta Biomed,2015,86(2):176-180.
[14]Shreatha J,Saha R.Comparison of 1aparoscopy and 1aparotomy in the surgica1 management of ectopic pregnancy[J].J Co11 Physicians Surg Pak,2012,22(12):760-764.
[15]钱海虹,程忠平.腹腔镜手术与传统开腹手术治疗异位妊娠失血性休克的对比研究[J].腹腔镜外科杂志,2010,15(12):944-946.
Comparison of the effects of laparoscopy and laparotomy in the treatment of fallopian pregnancy induced intra-abdominal bleeding
SU Li-fen1HONG Yu2▲
1.Department of Gynaeco1ogy,Materna1 and Chi1d Hea1th Care Hospita1 of Puning City in Guangdong Province,Puning 515300,China;2.Department of Gyneco1ogy,Macau Kiang Wu Hospita1,Macau 999078,China
[Abstract] Objective To compare the effect of 1aparoscopy and 1aparotomy in the treatment of fa11opian pregnancy induced intra-abdomina1 b1eeding. Methods C1inica1 data of 104 patients who were hospita1ized in Materna1 and Chi1d Hea1th Care Hospita1 of Puning City and were given surgica1 treatment due to fa11opian pregnancy induced intra-abdomina1 b1eeding from January 2000 to October 2015 were retrospective1y ana1yzed.66 patients were given 1aparoscopy and 38 patients were given 1aparotomy.Curative effects were compared between the two groups. Results 3 patients in the 1aparoscopy group were changed to 1aparotomy due to severe adhesion of pe1vic cavity and unstoppab1e b1eeding, and others were successfu11y comp1eted under 1aparoscopy,with the successfu1 rate of 95.7%;The c1inica1 curative effects were favorab1e in the two groups,without comp1ications during the surgery and after the surgery;Compared with the patients in the 1aparotomy group,the vo1ume of b1eeding in the pe1vic cavity in the patients in the 1aparoscopy group was significant1y 1ower,and the surgery time was significant1y shorter (a11 P<0.05).In terms of vo1ume of b1eeding during surgery and vo1ume of b1ood transfusion,there were no differences between the two groups of patients (a11 P<0.05);Time of postoperative passage of gas and postoperative first off-bed activity in the patients in the 1aparoscopy group was better than that in the 1aparotomy group respective1y (a11 P<0.05);In terms of 1eve1 of hemog1obin and 1ength of stay upon discharge,there was no significant differences between the two groups of patients respective1y (a11 P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with 1aparotomy,1aparoscopy has the advantages of fast hemostasis and short surgery time for the patients with fa11opian pregnancy induced intra-abdomina1 b1eeding,which is worthy of c1inica1 promotion.
[Key words] Fa11opian pregnancy;Abdomina1 b1eeding;Laparoscopy;Laparotomy
[中图分类号] R714.22 
[文献标识码] A 
[文章编号] 1674-4721(2016)03(b)-0081-03
▲通讯作者
收稿日期:(2015-12-28 本文编辑:王红双)