Lundorff P
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sahlgrenska Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl. 1997;164:81-4.
A randomized, prospective clinical trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic treatment versus conventional conservative abdominal surgery for tubal pregnancy.
Patients were stratified for age and risk determinants for ectopic pregnancy (EP). Forty-eight patients were treated by laparoscopy and 57 by laparotomy. Entry criteria were: size of the ectopic gestation < 4 cm, hemodynamic stability, accessibility for laparoscopic treatment and a trained laparoscopist on duty.
There was no difference between the groups regarding gestational duration, size and location of the ectopic gestation, and the mean preoperative hCG values. The groups did differ with respect to total operation time (73 min in the laparoscopy group vs. 88 min in the laparotomy group), hospital stay (2.2 days vs. 5.4 days) and convalescence period (11 days vs. 24 days). The rates of elimination of hCG were similar in the two groups, and there was no statistical difference in the rate of second intervention.
Patients treated by laparoscopy had a shorter hospital stay and a shorter convalescence than patients from the laparotomy group.
开展了一项随机前瞻性临床试验，以比较腹腔镜治疗与传统保守性腹部手术治疗输卵管妊娠的疗效。
根据年龄和异位妊娠（EP）的风险决定因素对患者进行分层。48例患者接受腹腔镜治疗，57例接受剖腹手术。纳入标准为：异位妊娠大小<4 cm、血流动力学稳定、可进行腹腔镜治疗且有训练有素的腹腔镜医师值班。
两组在妊娠持续时间、异位妊娠的大小和位置以及术前平均hCG值方面无差异。两组在总手术时间（腹腔镜组73分钟，剖腹手术组88分钟）、住院时间（2.2天对5.4天）和恢复期（11天对24天）方面存在差异。两组hCG清除率相似，二次干预率无统计学差异。
与剖腹手术组患者相比，接受腹腔镜治疗的患者住院时间更短，恢复期更短。
