Suction v. conventional curettage in incomplete abortion. A randomised controlled trial.
Suction v. conventional curettage in incomplete abortion. A randomised controlled trial.
复制标题
不全流产中的抽吸与传统刮宫术。
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1993
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. Crowther
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Verkuyl;C. Crowther
这项随机对照试验纳入了357例不全流产患者，比较了吸引刮宫术与传统刮宫术的子宫排空效果。与178例常规刮宫术患者相比，179例接受吸引刮宫术的患者术中失血量显著降低（P < 0.0001），随访时平均血红蛋白水平显著升高。吸引刮除术是一个更快的程序和更少的痛苦。在流产后脓毒症的发生率或再排空率方面，两组之间没有差异。在子宫脓毒症的情况下使用吸引刮宫术没有遇到任何问题。在一个输血应该保持在绝对最低限度的时代，吸引刮宫术将有助于在几个方面节省血液。
This randomised controlled trial of 357 patients who had had an incomplete abortion compared suction curettage with conventional curettage for evacuation of the uterus. The 179 patients undergoing suction curettage had a significantly lower intra-operative blood loss (P < 0.0001) and a significantly higher mean haemoglobin level at follow-up compared with the 178 patients who had conventional curettage. Suction curettage was a faster procedure and less painful. No difference was found between the two groups with regard to the incidence of post-abortal sepsis, or the re-evacuation rate. No problems were encountered with the use of suction curettage in the presence of uterine sepsis. In an era where blood transfusions should be kept to an absolute minimum, suction curettage will help to save blood in several ways.