李孟春 何靜 馮君 張躍明 侯文杰
基金項(xiàng)目:蘇州市自貿(mào)區(qū)生物醫(yī)藥創(chuàng)新發(fā)展強(qiáng)鏈補(bǔ)鏈科技專項(xiàng)(醫(yī)工結(jié)合協(xié)同創(chuàng)新研究)(SZM2022008);蘇州大學(xué)新型功能高分子材料國家地方聯(lián)合工程實(shí)驗(yàn)室開放課題(SDGC2204)
作者單位:215000? ?蘇州,蘇州大學(xué)附屬第四醫(yī)院(蘇州市獨(dú)墅湖醫(yī)院)婦產(chǎn)科
通信作者:侯文杰,E-mail: wjhou@suda.edu.cn
【摘要】目的 分析經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)在治療剖宮產(chǎn)瘢痕部位妊娠(CSP)的安全性及可行性。方法 選取行經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)的11例CSP患者作為研究組,行多孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)的10例CSP患者作為對(duì)照組,比較2組的基線資料及圍術(shù)期相關(guān)臨床數(shù)據(jù)。結(jié)果 經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡組與對(duì)照組的患者年齡、妊娠次數(shù)、剖宮產(chǎn)次數(shù)、距上次剖宮產(chǎn)時(shí)間、臨床分型、停經(jīng)時(shí)間以及有無陰道出血癥狀比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均> 0.05)。2組的手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、術(shù)后保留導(dǎo)尿時(shí)間比較差異亦無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均> 0.05)。經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡組的術(shù)后疼痛數(shù)字等級(jí)評(píng)定量表評(píng)分低于對(duì)照組,住院時(shí)間短于對(duì)照組(P均< 0.05)。結(jié)論 經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)與傳統(tǒng)多孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)相比,能減輕CSP患者術(shù)后疼痛及縮短住院時(shí)間,且安全性相當(dāng),美容效果更好,具有可行性。
【關(guān)鍵詞】瘢痕部位妊娠;經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡;子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù);加速康復(fù)
Safety and feasibility of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic uterine artery embolization combined with surgical embryo retrieval for the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy Li Mengchun, He Jing, Feng Jun, Zhang Yueming, Hou Wenjie. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University(Suzhou Dushu Lake Hospital), Suzhou 215000, China
Corresponding author: Hou Wenjie, E-mail: wjhou@suda.edu.cn
【Abstract】Objective To evaluate the safety and feasibility of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic uterine artery embolization combined with incision and embryo retrieval in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy. Methods Eleven patients with cesarean scar pregnancy who underwent transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic uterine artery embolization combined with incision and embryo retrieval were recruited in the study group, and ten patients who underwent multi-hole laparoscopic uterine artery embolization combined with incision and embryo retrieval were assigned into the control group. Baseline data and perioperative clinical data were compared between two groups. Results No significant differences were found in age, number of pregnancies, number of cesarean sections, time interval from last cesarean section, clinical classification, number of days of menopause, and the presence or absence of symptoms of vaginal bleeding between two groups (all P > 0.05). No significant differences were observed in operation time, intraoperative bleeding and postoperative retention time of catheterization between two groups (all P > 0.05). In the study group, postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) score was significantly lower and the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter compared with those in the control group (both P < 0.05). Conclusions Compared with traditional multi-port laparoscopic uterine artery embolization combined with incision and embryo retrieval, transumbilical single-port laparoscopic uterine artery embolization combined with incision and embryo retrieval is a feasible and safe procedure, which can alleviate postoperative pain, shortern the length of hospital stay and yield better cosmetic results.
【Key words】Cesarean scar pregnancy; Transumbilical single-port laparoscopy; Uterine artery embolization;
Accelerated recovery
剖宮產(chǎn)瘢痕部位妊娠(CSP)指孕囊著床于既往剖宮產(chǎn)手術(shù)子宮切口的瘢痕處,是剖宮產(chǎn)后一種較為特殊的并發(fā)癥,根據(jù)超聲檢查顯示的著床于子宮前壁瘢痕處的孕囊的生長方向以及子宮前壁孕囊與膀胱間子宮肌層的厚度可將其分為3種類型[1-2]。因?yàn)樵诩韧囊欢螘r(shí)間內(nèi)剖宮產(chǎn)率上升,CSP發(fā)病率也呈現(xiàn)上升趨勢(shì)[3]。CSP患者如未得到及時(shí)救治,可能會(huì)出現(xiàn)嚴(yán)重出血、子宮破裂等,嚴(yán)重時(shí)甚至需要切除子宮,并危及患者生命[2]。CSP的治療方式較多,但目前尚無統(tǒng)一的治療方式,腹腔鏡手術(shù)是治療Ⅱ型及Ⅲ型CSP的重要手術(shù)方式[3-4]。隨著醫(yī)療技術(shù)的發(fā)展,單孔腹腔鏡技術(shù)也得到迅速發(fā)展,在外科及婦產(chǎn)科中的應(yīng)用越來越普及[5-7],但有關(guān)其在CSP治療中的文獻(xiàn)報(bào)道較少。為此,本研究主要對(duì)經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡和傳統(tǒng)多孔腹腔鏡行子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)治療CSP進(jìn)行分析,評(píng)估單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)治療CSP的安全性及可行性,現(xiàn)報(bào)道如下。
對(duì)象與方法
一、研究對(duì)象
收集2021年1月—2023年10月在蘇州市獨(dú)墅湖醫(yī)院就診并且行腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)的所有CSP患者一般資料及圍術(shù)期資料,進(jìn)行回顧性分析。將行經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)的11例CSP患者作為單孔組,行傳統(tǒng)多孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)的10例CSP患者作為對(duì)照組。病例納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):符合CSP診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)且行腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù);臨床CSP分型為Ⅱ型和Ⅲ型的患者;病歷資料完善;手術(shù)主刀為同一人。排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):術(shù)中更改手術(shù)方式者;臨床資料不全者;行腹腔鏡手術(shù)治療前采用其他治療方式的患者;凝血功能障礙者。本研究經(jīng)蘇州市獨(dú)墅湖醫(yī)院倫理委員會(huì)批準(zhǔn)(批件號(hào):2023倫研批第231009號(hào)),所有患者及家屬均已簽署知情同意書。
二、手術(shù)方法
根據(jù)術(shù)前評(píng)估對(duì)患者采用經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡或多孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)。單孔組:全身麻醉誘導(dǎo)成功后,患者取截石位,常規(guī)消毒鋪巾。取臍孔處縱切口,長約3 cm,直達(dá)腹腔,擴(kuò)大切口后放置杭州康基XV 型套裝 AQ一次性套管穿刺器。予腹腔充入CO2形成氣腹,腹內(nèi)壓力為14 mmHg(1 mmHg= 0 .133 kPa)。電剪刀打開左側(cè)闊韌帶后葉,暴露左側(cè)輸尿管后,沿輸尿管走形找到左側(cè)子宮動(dòng)脈(圖1A),用可吸收夾夾閉(圖1B),同法處理對(duì)側(cè)。超聲刀打開膀胱反折腹膜,下推膀胱,沿子宮前壁下段瘢痕處切除瘢痕組織,見孕囊樣組織及絨毛(圖1C),去除妊娠物及瘢痕組織(圖1D),縫合切口處,生理鹽水沖洗腹腔,查無活動(dòng)性出血后放氣、退鏡,逐層縫合切口。
對(duì)照組:全身麻醉誘導(dǎo)成功后,患者取膀胱截石位,常規(guī)消毒鋪巾。取臍孔上1 cm和左右麥?zhǔn)宵c(diǎn)切口以及左麥?zhǔn)宵c(diǎn)外上切口,美國強(qiáng)生B12SRT/B5ST套管穿刺針穿刺,充入CO2形成氣腹,腹內(nèi)壓力為14 mmHg(1 mmHg= 0.133 kPa)。超聲刀打開左側(cè)闊韌帶后葉,后續(xù)操作同單孔組。
三、觀察指標(biāo)
收集并對(duì)比2組的以下指標(biāo):①基線資料,包括年齡、既往妊娠次數(shù)、剖宮產(chǎn)次數(shù)、距上次剖宮產(chǎn)的時(shí)間、臨床分型、停經(jīng)時(shí)間以及有陰道出血癥狀的例數(shù);②圍術(shù)期指標(biāo),包括手術(shù)時(shí)間(從開始麻醉時(shí)至術(shù)畢)、術(shù)中出血量(術(shù)畢后負(fù)壓吸引裝置中液體總量-術(shù)中沖洗液量)、術(shù)后疼痛評(píng)分、術(shù)后保留導(dǎo)尿時(shí)間、住院時(shí)間,其中術(shù)后疼痛強(qiáng)度評(píng)分采用數(shù)字等級(jí)評(píng)定量表(NRS),用數(shù)字0~10的刻度標(biāo)示不同程度的疼痛強(qiáng)度等級(jí),由患者指認(rèn),0為無痛,10為最劇烈疼痛,4以下為輕度痛(不影響睡眠),4~7為中度痛,7以上為重度痛(導(dǎo)致不能睡眠或從睡眠中痛醒);③術(shù)后隨訪情況,記錄患者在術(shù)后1個(gè)月的隨訪結(jié)果,如是否出現(xiàn)臍疝、B超復(fù)查有否殘留。
四、統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)處理
使用SPSS 25.0進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析。符合正態(tài)分布的計(jì)量資料以表示,組間比較采用獨(dú)立樣本t檢驗(yàn);不符合正態(tài)分布的計(jì)量資料以M(P25,P75)表示,組間比較采用非參數(shù)檢驗(yàn),計(jì)數(shù)資料以n(%)表示,組間比較采用Fisher確切概率法。P < 0.05表示差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
結(jié)果
一、單孔組與對(duì)照組CSP患者的基線資料比較
21例CSP患者術(shù)前的β-HCG水平>10 000 IU/L。
單孔組與對(duì)照組患者的年齡、既往妊娠次數(shù)、剖宮產(chǎn)次數(shù)、距上次剖宮產(chǎn)時(shí)間、臨床分型、停經(jīng)時(shí)間以及有無陰道出血癥狀比較差異均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均> 0.05)。見表1。
二、單孔組與對(duì)照組CSP患者的圍術(shù)期指標(biāo)比較
2組的手術(shù)時(shí)間、術(shù)中出血量、術(shù)后保留導(dǎo)尿時(shí)間比較差異均無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P均> 0.05)。與傳統(tǒng)組相比,單孔組的術(shù)后NRS評(píng)分較低、住院時(shí)間較短(P均< 0.05),見表2。2組患者出院時(shí)均無發(fā)生傷口感染,術(shù)后病理均見絨毛。
三、單孔組與對(duì)照組CSP患者的隨訪結(jié)果
術(shù)后1個(gè)月門診復(fù)查時(shí)均未發(fā)現(xiàn)臍疝、切口感染,復(fù)查B超均未提示子宮內(nèi)有組織殘留。
討論
CSP是一種特殊類型的異位妊娠,其發(fā)病機(jī)制尚不明確,因患者在孕早期缺乏特異性臨床表現(xiàn),起病較為隱匿,不易被發(fā)現(xiàn)。CSP的治療原則是早診斷、早終止、早清除,若不能及時(shí)清除妊娠物,患者在繼續(xù)妊娠的過程中可能發(fā)生大出血、子宮破裂,嚴(yán)重時(shí)甚至?xí)<盎颊呱?-2, 8]。CSP的治療方式較多,包括藥物治療、手術(shù)治療及兩者的聯(lián)合,但目前尚未有明確最佳的治療方式[1, 9]。腹腔鏡手術(shù)是一種重要的CSP手術(shù)治療方式,不僅可以充分地暴露手術(shù)視野,探查盆腹腔情況,避免膀胱損傷,同時(shí)還可以清除病灶、修復(fù)子宮瘢痕[10]。有研究表明,腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)能減少術(shù)中出血量并降低中轉(zhuǎn)開腹的概率,能有效地修復(fù)瘢痕缺陷,是一種安全、有效的治療方式[11-14]。因其對(duì)子宮動(dòng)脈進(jìn)行阻斷,減少子宮的血供,從而減少術(shù)中的出血,同時(shí)因切開取胚后對(duì)子宮進(jìn)行修補(bǔ),加固并重建子宮下段,從而達(dá)到有效修補(bǔ)瘢痕缺陷的效果[11-12]。另有研究表明,剖宮產(chǎn)瘢痕缺損的修復(fù)可降低患者在未來出現(xiàn)復(fù)發(fā)性和繼發(fā)性不孕癥的可能性[14]。隨著醫(yī)療技術(shù)的發(fā)展以及女性對(duì)美的追求,腹腔鏡手術(shù)也從既往的多孔入路發(fā)展為單孔入路,在此背景下經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡技術(shù)應(yīng)運(yùn)而生并進(jìn)入飛速發(fā)展階段,受到廣大醫(yī)師的推崇及患者的歡迎[5, 15]。然而臍部周圍凹陷的邊界皮膚直接與深筋膜相連,缺乏淺筋膜,較為薄弱,以此處作為切口容易造成切口疝、切口裂開、感染等風(fēng)險(xiǎn),故經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡手術(shù)備受爭議[16]。
本研究對(duì)2組患者的年齡、妊娠次數(shù)、剖宮產(chǎn)次數(shù)、距上次剖宮產(chǎn)時(shí)間、停經(jīng)時(shí)間及術(shù)前是否有陰道出血進(jìn)行了對(duì)比分析,組間比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,表明2組圍術(shù)期資料及隨訪資料具有可比性。本研究顯示,兩組手術(shù)時(shí)長、術(shù)中出血量、術(shù)后保留導(dǎo)尿時(shí)間比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,且兩組術(shù)后隨訪均無發(fā)生臍疝、切口感染等并發(fā)癥,表明經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)與多孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合妊娠切開取胚術(shù)的療效與安全性相當(dāng)。但由于經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡受限于單孔操作,相較于多孔腹腔鏡手術(shù),操作者失去操作三角,鏡頭與操作手臂平行,阻擋術(shù)者的視線,同時(shí)還影響術(shù)者對(duì)病灶深度、距離的判斷,使操作難度增加,且CSP病灶位于子宮頸峽部,手術(shù)視野暴露和縫合較困難,增加手術(shù)的難度[5, 7, 17]。本研究中,兩組圍術(shù)期數(shù)據(jù)比較差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,這依賴于術(shù)者的精細(xì)與熟練操作。臍部作為先天的瘢痕組織,術(shù)后利用先天的褶皺掩藏手術(shù)切口,可以滿足人們對(duì)美的追求,但此處較為薄弱,容易造成切口疝及切口裂開,所以在切開時(shí)應(yīng)注意避免完全切開臍部,手術(shù)結(jié)束后在進(jìn)行縫合時(shí)完全縫合腹膜及皮下組織且進(jìn)行加固縫合,減少術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生[18-19]。在術(shù)后的NRS評(píng)分以及住院時(shí)間方面,單孔組的NRS評(píng)分低于對(duì)照組,且住院時(shí)間短于對(duì)照組,這可能是臍部的脂肪較薄,以及存在的血管、神經(jīng)、肌肉組織較少,僅在此做一切口可減輕患者的疼痛,使患者能較早地下床活動(dòng),術(shù)后恢復(fù)較快,縮短住院時(shí)間[5, 7, 20]。
本研究的術(shù)后隨訪中,所有患者均無發(fā)生陰道大出血、切口疝、切口裂開、傷口感染等并發(fā)癥,表明經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)安全、可行。同時(shí)隨訪中發(fā)現(xiàn)因?yàn)閱慰捉M的瘢痕隱藏在臍孔里,外表基本無痕,滿足患者對(duì)美的追求,所以單孔組患者出院后1個(gè)月至門診復(fù)查時(shí),均會(huì)表達(dá)對(duì)傷口的滿意度很高,而多孔組術(shù)后除臍部一切口外腹部皮膚會(huì)暫時(shí)留下3個(gè)操作傷口,因此復(fù)查時(shí)并不會(huì)如單孔組患者表達(dá)自身對(duì)腹壁切口的滿意度。
綜上所述,經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷術(shù)聯(lián)合切開取胚術(shù)安全、可行,且其具有術(shù)后疼痛輕、住院時(shí)間短、美容效果好的優(yōu)點(diǎn),適用于CSP患者的手術(shù)治療。但本研究也存在不足:研究樣本量較小,且為回顧性分析,存在一定的偏倚,后續(xù)將進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)大樣本量及設(shè)計(jì)前瞻性研究來進(jìn)一步驗(yàn)證研究結(jié)論。
參 考 文 獻(xiàn)
[1] 中華醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)婦產(chǎn)科學(xué)分會(huì)計(jì)劃生育學(xué)組. 剖宮產(chǎn)術(shù)后子宮瘢痕妊娠診治專家共識(shí)(2016)[J]. 全科醫(yī)學(xué)臨床與教育, 2017, 15(1): 5-9.
Family Planning Group of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Branch of the Chinese Medical Association.Expert consensus on diagnosis and treatment of uterine scar pregnancy after cesarean section (2016)[J]. Clin Educ Gen Pract, 2017, 15(1): 5-9.
[2] Calì G, Timor-Tritsch I E, Palacios-Jaraquemada J, et al. Outcome of cesarean scar pregnancy managed expectantly: systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2018, 51(2): 169-175.
[3] Roche C, McDonnell R, Tucker P, et al. Caesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: evolution from medical to surgical management[J]. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol, 2020, 60(6): 852-857.
[4] Diagnosis and management of ectopic pregnancy: green-top guideline No. 21. BJOG,2016, 123(13):e15-e55.
[5] 周明輝, 紀(jì)燕琴, 邱華娟. 經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡全子宮切除術(shù)不同途徑縫合陰道殘端的研究[J]. 新醫(yī)學(xué), 2021, 52(7): 504-507.
Zhou M H, Ji Y Q, Qiu H J. Study of different methods of suture of vaginal stump in transumbilical single-port laparoscopic total hysterectomy[J]. J New Med, 2021, 52(7): 504-507.
[6] 巫慧, 彭靚, 李文佳, 等. 經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡手術(shù)在婦科良惡性腫瘤治療中的研究進(jìn)展[J]. 贛南醫(yī)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào), 2022, 42(6): 661-664, 670.
Wu H, Peng J, Li W J, et al. Research progress of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of gynecologic benign and malignant tumor[J]. J Gannan Med Univ, 2022, 42(6): 661-664, 670.
[7] 馬迎春. 單孔腹腔鏡技術(shù)在婦科手術(shù)中的應(yīng)用:優(yōu)勢(shì)、并發(fā)癥與難點(diǎn)探討[J]. 山東大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào) (醫(yī)學(xué)版), 2019, 57(12): 31-36.
Ma Y C. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in gynecology: advantages, complications and challenges[J]. J Shandong Univ (Health Sci), 2019, 57(12): 31-36.
[8] Ban Y, Shen J, Wang X, et al. Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy clinical classification system with recommended surgical strategy[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2023, 141(5): 927-936.
[9] Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), Miller R, Timor-Tritsch I E, et al. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) consult series #49: cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 222(5): B2-B14.
[10] Pickett C M, Minalt N, Higgins O M, et al. A laparoscopic approach to cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2022, 226(3): 417-419.
[11] 李紅. 腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷聯(lián)合病灶切除術(shù)治療剖宮產(chǎn)瘢痕妊娠的臨床價(jià)值研究[J]. 貴州醫(yī)藥, 2022, 46(2): 274-275.
Li H. Clinical value of laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion combined with focus resection in the treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Guizhou Med J, 2022, 46(2): 274-275.
[12] 曾克非,夏婷婷.腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈結(jié)扎術(shù)與子宮動(dòng)脈栓塞術(shù)在剖宮產(chǎn)術(shù)后子宮瘢痕妊娠中的治療效果比較[J].醫(yī)學(xué)信息, 2023, 36(9): 147-150.
Zeng K F, Xia T T. Comparison of laparoscopic uterine artery ligation and uterine artery embolization in the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy[J]. J Med Inf, 2023, 20(7): 15-19.
[13] 吳靜. 腹腔鏡下子宮動(dòng)脈阻斷聯(lián)合病灶切除術(shù)治療剖宮產(chǎn)瘢痕妊娠的臨床價(jià)值分析[J]. 系統(tǒng)醫(yī)學(xué), 2022, 7(3): 60-63.
Wu J. Clinical value analysis of laparoscopic uterine artery blockade com-bined with focal resection in the treatment of cesarean section scar pregnancy[J]. Syst Med, 2022, 7(3): 60-63.
[14] Yoon R, Sasaki K, Miller C E. Laparoscopic excision of cesarean scar pregnancy with scar revision[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2021, 28(4): 746-747.
[15] Chen S, Zhang G, Hua K, et al. Single-port laparoscopy versus conventional laparoscopy of benign adnexal masses during pregnancy: a retrospective case-control study[J]. J Int Med Res, 2022, 50(10): 3000605221128153.
[16] Zhu Y P, Liang S, Zhu L, et al. Trocar-site hernia after gynecological laparoscopic surgery: a 20-year, single-center experience[J]. Chin Med J(Engl), 2019, 132(22): 2677-2683.
[17] Sandberg E M, la Chapelle C F, van den Tweel M M, et al. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus conventional laparoscopy for hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2017, 295(5): 1089-1103.
[18] Noh J J, Kim T H, Kim C J, et al. Incisional hernia after 2498 single-port access (SPA) gynecologic surgery over a 10-year period[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 17388.
[19] 曹清麗. 經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡在婦科良性疾病中的應(yīng)用及可行性探討[J]. 中國醫(yī)藥科學(xué), 2020, 10(24): 109-112.
Cao Q L. Study of application and feasibility of transumbilical single-port laparoscopy in benign gynecological diseases[J]. China Med Pharm, 2020, 10(24): 109-112.
[20] 許俊暉, 李永紅. 經(jīng)臍單孔腹腔鏡與傳統(tǒng)腹腔鏡手術(shù)治療卵巢囊腫的療效對(duì)比分析[J]. 實(shí)用婦產(chǎn)科雜志, 2021, 37(11): 854-857.
Xu J H, Li Y H. Comparative analysis of the efficacy between transumbilical single-port lapa-roscopy and conventional laparoscopy for ovarian cystectomy[J]. J Pract Obstet Gynecol, 2021, 37(11): 854-857.
(收稿日期:2023-11-27)
(責(zé)任編輯:林燕薇)