• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Thermal balloon ablation versus transcervical endometrial resection: evaluation of postoperative pelvic pain in women treated for dysfunctional uterine bleeding.

作者信息

Vitagliano A, Bertin M, Conte L, Borgato S, Leggieri C, Fagherazzi S

出版信息

Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2014;41(4):405-8.

PMID:25134286
Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To evaluate postoperative pain after mini-invasive surgical treatment for dysfunctional uterine bleeding (DUB) with transcervical endometrial resection or thermal ablation balloon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A longitudinal observational study, analyzing 47 women affected by DUB who underwent endometrial ablation was conducted. The authors collected evaluation of pelvic pain at one and four hours after intervention and the individual necessity of analgesics. After 30 days, all patients underwent a gynecological visit to evaluate postoperative outcome.

RESULTS

Pelvic pain was higher one and four hours after procedure in thermal balloon ablation group, and patients in the same group required more analgesic rescue dose. There were no complications such as uterine perforation, heavy blood loss or thermal injuries with both the procedures.

CONCLUSION

Thermal balloon ablation appears a more painful procedure than endometrial resection, both in the immediate postsurgical time and 30 days after surgery. Ad hoc anaesthesiologic and analgesic protocol should be adopted to ensure quick recovery and good acceptance of the procedure.

摘要

相似文献

1
Thermal balloon ablation versus transcervical endometrial resection: evaluation of postoperative pelvic pain in women treated for dysfunctional uterine bleeding.
Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2014;41(4):405-8.
2
[Thermal balloon endometrial ablation for dysfunctional uterine bleeding: technical aspects and results. A prospective cohort study of 152 cases].[热球囊子宫内膜消融术治疗功能失调性子宫出血:技术要点与结果。一项对152例患者的前瞻性队列研究]
Tunis Med. 2008 May;86(5):473-8.
3
Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.子宫内膜切除术和消融术与子宫切除术治疗月经过多的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Nov 29(11):CD000329. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub2.
4
Long-term clinical outcomes following resectoscopic endometrial ablation of non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia in women with abnormal uterine bleeding.子宫异常出血女性经宫腔镜子宫内膜切除术治疗非典型子宫内膜增生后的长期临床结局
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015 Jan;22(1):66-77. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.07.009. Epub 2014 Jul 15.
5
Endometrial ablation in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding.子宫内膜去除术在异常子宫出血管理中的应用
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 Apr;37(4):362-79. doi: 10.1016/s1701-2163(15)30288-7.
6
Patient satisfaction with thermal balloon endometrial ablation. A retrospective review.患者对热球囊子宫内膜消融术的满意度:一项回顾性研究。
J Reprod Med. 2003 Aug;48(8):635-6.
7
Foley catheter balloon endometrial ablation: successful treatment of three cases.Foley导管球囊子宫内膜消融术:三例成功治疗病例
J Pak Med Assoc. 2012 Mar;62(3):284-6.
8
Does postoperative pain predict the outcome of endometrial ablation?术后疼痛能否预测子宫内膜消融术的结果?
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2013 Aug;39(8):1319-23. doi: 10.1111/jog.12064. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
9
Impact of prostaglandin F2-alpha and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) on pain in patients undergoing thermal balloon endometrial ablation.前列腺素F2-α和肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)对接受热球囊子宫内膜消融术患者疼痛的影响。
Coll Antropol. 2013 Dec;37(4):1185-90.
10
Endometrial thermal balloon ablation in women with previous cesarean delivery: pilot study.有剖宫产史妇女的子宫内膜热球消融术:初步研究。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 May-Jun;17(3):358-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.02.002.

引用本文的文献

1
Cavaterm treatment in high - risk surgical patients.高危手术患者的Cavaterm治疗。
Caspian J Intern Med. 2021 Apr;12(3):336-341. doi: 10.22088/cjim.12.3.336.