Objectives:To compare the clinical effects of laparoscopic oviduct -sparing operation and natu-ral orifice transluminal endoscopic operation on ectopic pregnancy.Methods:A total of 56 ectopic pregnancy pa-tients treated by laparoscopic oviduct -sparing operation were selected as control group and 43 ectopic pregnancy pa-tients treated by natural orifice transluminal endoscopic operation were selected as observation group.The operative situation,recovery rate and clinical efficacy of the two groups were compared.Results:The blood lose of observa-tion group was significantly less than that of control group (P <0.01 ).There was no significant difference in opera-tive duration between two groups (P >0.05).The tubal flow rate and intrauterine pregnancy in observation group were significantly higher than those in control group (P <0.05).And there was no significant difference in ectopic pregnancy recurrent rate between two groups (P >0.05).The wound healing time and length of stay in observation group were significantly less than those in control group (P <0.05).Conclusion:Ectopic pregnancy treated by natural orifice transluminal endoscopic operation has a better clinical efficacy,with less intraoperative injury and better recovery,which makes it worth clinical application.%目的：考察腹腔镜下保守手术与经阴道内镜手术治疗宫外孕的临床效果差异。方法：回顾性分析56例腹腔镜下保守手术治疗的宫外孕患者临床资料并设为对照组和43例自然腔道内镜手术治疗宫外孕患者临床资料并设为观察组。比较两组患者术中资料、术后恢复速率和临床疗效。结果：观察组患者术中出血量显著低于对照组（P ＜0．01），手术时间无统计学差异（P ＞0．05）。观察组患者输卵管畅通率和宫内妊娠率显著高于对照组（P ＜0．05）。两组间再次宫外妊娠率差异无统计学意义（P ＞0．05）。观察组患者切口愈合时间和住院时间显著低于对照组（P ＜0．05）。结论：经阴道内镜手术治疗宫外孕疗效更佳且术中伤害更小、术后恢复更快，具有临床应用价值。
展开▼
