不同宫内节育器用于瘢痕子宫育龄期女性的临床效果

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2022.03.022

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (1103 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract 【Objective】To investigate the clinical effect of different intrauterine devices (IUD) on women of childbearing age with scar uterus. 【Methods】 A total of 240 women of childbearing age with IUD placed in scar uterus after cesarean section in our hospital from June 2015 to June 2018 were selected. According to different IUD placement, they were divided into four groups: Uterine-ring IUD group (n=60), T-type IUD group (n=60), Mycu IUD group (n=60) and Gyneflex IN/S IUD group (n=60), with 60 cases in each group. The failure rate after IUD placement, the incidence of adverse reactions and the continuation of IUD for 1 ~ 2 years were compared among the four groups. 【Results】 The postoperative failure rate of the Gyneflex group (1.67%) was significantly lower than that of the Uterine-ring group (8.33%), the T-type group (16.67%) and the Mycu group (8.33%) (P<0.05); The total incidence of adverse reactions of the Geneflex IN/S group (18.33%) was significantly lower than that of the Uterine-ring group (35.00%), the T-type group (41.67%) and the Mycu group (30.00%). The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05); The IUD continuation rate after 2 years of operation in the four groups was lower than that after 1 year of operation. The IUD continuation rate after 2 years of operation in the Genyflex group (88.33%) was significantly higher than that in the Uterine-ring group (61.67%), the T-type group (51.67%) and the Mycu group (70.00%) (P<0.05). 【Conclusion】Compared with Uterine-ring IUD, T-type IUD and Mycu IUD,Gyneflex IN/S IUD has lower failure rate and lower total incidence of adverse reactions after IUD placement with higher continuation rate after 2 years of operation, which is worthy of clinical application.

Key words： Cesarean Section/AE Intrauterine Devices Contraception/MT Treatment Outcome

Received: 05 December 2021

PACS:

R711.5

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	BAI Rui
	SHI Fan

Cite this article:

BAI Rui,SHI Fan. Clinical Effects of Different Intrauterine Devices on Women of Childbearing Age with Scar Uterus[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RESEARCH, 2022, 39(3): 401-403.

URL:

http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7171.2022.03.022 OR http://journal07.magtech.org.cn/yxlcyj/EN/Y2022/V39/I3/401

[1] 程利南,狄文,丁岩, 等.女性避孕方法临床应用的中国专家共识[J].中华妇产科杂志,2018,53(7):433-447.
[2] 叶凤如, 黄玉玲, 彭海燕, 等. 宫腔粘连分离术后宫腔留置节育器联合不同剂量雌激素对宫腔再粘连、月经恢复及妊娠率的影响[J].医学临床研究, 2018, 35(6):1086-1088.
[3] 王莹莹, 朱长虹. 宫内节育器与女性生殖系统肿瘤[J].现代泌尿生殖肿瘤杂志, 2017, 9(3):129-132.
[4] 胡丽芳. 宫内节育器不良反应调查及相关应对策略[J].中国妇幼保健, 2018, 33(2):394-397.
[5] 张凤仙, 温岩, 贾桂风, 等. 不同终止妊娠方式对异位妊娠的影响[J].中国妇幼保健, 2016,31(6):1178-1180.
[6] 李鹰, 郭俭. 术泰舒联合宫内节育器、雌孕激素序贯治疗预防宫腔镜术后宫腔粘连的疗效观察[J].医学临床研究, 2018, 35(1):131-133.
[7] 孙凤珠. 腹部B超引导下瘢痕子宫放置宫内节育器的经验探析[J].中国医药指南, 2018,16(21):62.
[8] 卢秀霞, 贾晓, 袁萍,等. 放置与未放置IUD子宫异常出血患者的子宫内膜病理变化对比分析[J].中国妇幼健康研究, 2017, 28(3):323-325.
[9] 牟燕琳.宫内节育器及其对使用者的影响[J].四川医学,2017,38(1):102-105.
[10] 姜香花. T环、吉妮环、爱母环3种宫内节育器避孕效果对比[J].中国保健营养, 2016, 26(22):127.
[11] 全珍, 郭伟娣, 曾超益, 等. 吉妮环用于第二次剖宫产术后育龄期妇女的临床研究[J].中国医药科学, 2019, 9(10):76-78.
[12] 巴磊, 孙志明, 张学宁, 等. 宫铜300宫内节育器副反应及其影响因素的Meta分析[J].实用妇产科杂志, 2017, 33(7):525-529.
[13] 李元琴, 张静, 潘红, 等. 含吲哚美辛固定式宫内节育器用于人工终止妊娠术后即时放置的临床效果及安全性分析[J].山西医药杂志, 2019 48(14):1704-1706.
[14] 黄霞.爱母环、元宫环的避孕效果及不良反应对比分析[J].中国实用医药,2016,11(5):283-284.
[15] 陈艳杰, 任敏, 姜中慧, 等. 三维经阴道超声评估宫内节育器位置异常及不良反应的临床研究[J].中华超声影像学杂志, 2019, 28(5):439-443.
[16] 刘柳春.瘢痕子宫放置宫内节育器的效果分析[J].实用妇科内分泌电子杂志,2017,4(1):42-43.