{"title":"GnRH类似物(戈舍林)治疗与腹腔镜热疗保守手术治疗子宫内膜异位症的比较","authors":"Mohamed A. Hefni, Ade Apoola, Omran","doi":"10.1046/j.1365-2508.1998.00154.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To compare the effectiveness of medical treatment of endometriosis with conservative surgical treatment, either alone or combined with medical treatment.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Case-controlled, prospective observational clinical study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting</h3>\n \n <p>Gynaecology Department at Benenden Hospital, Kent, UK.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patients</h3>\n \n <p>98 women proven laparoscopically to have endometriosis which was staged using the Revised American Fertility Society Classification (rAFS).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Interventions</h3>\n \n <p>The first group underwent medical treatment with the GnRH analogue, goserelin (3.6 mg depot) and the second group was treated using laparoscopic diathermy. Some members of the second group who had endometriomas and stage IV endometriosis (AFS classification) also had GnRH analogue in addition to laparoscopic diathermy. There was no statistically significant difference between the age, parity and severity of symptoms of the groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main outcome measures</h3>\n \n <p>Variations in patient-reported symptoms, physician-recorded clinical examination and in second-look laparoscopic findings, in each group, 6 months after treatment completion.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Treatment with laparoscopic diathermy, either alone or in combination with GnRH analogue, was associated with a significantly better outcome, as assessed by a self-report of marked improvement in symptom score or cure, compared with treatment with GnRH analogue alone (relative risk 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38–4.02). The surgical treatment group were also 2.52 times more likely to show either marked improvement or cure, as judged by clinical assessment, than the group of patients who received GnRH analogue alone (relative risk 2.52, 95% CI 1.54–4.14). There was an improvement or cure in 71% of patients in the surgical group, when assessed laparoscopically at follow up, compared with 49% in the medical group.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results showed that patients with endometriosis receiving conservative surgery, either alone or in combination with GnRH analogue, were at least two times more likely to have either marked improvement or cure, as assessed by patient-reported symptoms and clinical findings at 6-month follow up, than those who received GnRH analogue alone.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100599,"journal":{"name":"Gynaecological Endoscopy","volume":"7 1","pages":"37-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1365-2508.1998.00154.x","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison between medical treatment by GnRH analogue (goserelin) and conservative surgery by laparoscopic diathermy for the management of endometriosis\",\"authors\":\"Mohamed A. Hefni, Ade Apoola, Omran\",\"doi\":\"10.1046/j.1365-2508.1998.00154.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>To compare the effectiveness of medical treatment of endometriosis with conservative surgical treatment, either alone or combined with medical treatment.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design</h3>\\n \\n <p>Case-controlled, prospective observational clinical study.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Setting</h3>\\n \\n <p>Gynaecology Department at Benenden Hospital, Kent, UK.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Patients</h3>\\n \\n <p>98 women proven laparoscopically to have endometriosis which was staged using the Revised American Fertility Society Classification (rAFS).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Interventions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The first group underwent medical treatment with the GnRH analogue, goserelin (3.6 mg depot) and the second group was treated using laparoscopic diathermy. Some members of the second group who had endometriomas and stage IV endometriosis (AFS classification) also had GnRH analogue in addition to laparoscopic diathermy. There was no statistically significant difference between the age, parity and severity of symptoms of the groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main outcome measures</h3>\\n \\n <p>Variations in patient-reported symptoms, physician-recorded clinical examination and in second-look laparoscopic findings, in each group, 6 months after treatment completion.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Treatment with laparoscopic diathermy, either alone or in combination with GnRH analogue, was associated with a significantly better outcome, as assessed by a self-report of marked improvement in symptom score or cure, compared with treatment with GnRH analogue alone (relative risk 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38–4.02). The surgical treatment group were also 2.52 times more likely to show either marked improvement or cure, as judged by clinical assessment, than the group of patients who received GnRH analogue alone (relative risk 2.52, 95% CI 1.54–4.14). There was an improvement or cure in 71% of patients in the surgical group, when assessed laparoscopically at follow up, compared with 49% in the medical group.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The results showed that patients with endometriosis receiving conservative surgery, either alone or in combination with GnRH analogue, were at least two times more likely to have either marked improvement or cure, as assessed by patient-reported symptoms and clinical findings at 6-month follow up, than those who received GnRH analogue alone.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gynaecological Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"37-41\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1365-2508.1998.00154.x\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gynaecological Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2508.1998.00154.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynaecological Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2508.1998.00154.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
目的比较药物治疗子宫内膜异位症与保守性手术治疗的疗效。设计病例对照、前瞻性观察性临床研究。英国肯特郡Benenden医院妇科。患者98名妇女经腹腔镜证实患有子宫内膜异位症,采用修订的美国生育学会分类(rAFS)进行分期。干预措施第一组采用GnRH类似物goserelin (3.6 mg depot)治疗,第二组采用腹腔镜热疗治疗。第二组中一些患有子宫内膜异位症和IV期子宫内膜异位症(AFS分类)的患者除了进行腹腔镜热疗外,还进行了GnRH类似物治疗。两组患者的年龄、胎次和症状严重程度无统计学差异。主要结局指标:治疗结束后6个月,每组患者报告的症状、医生记录的临床检查和复查腹腔镜检查结果的差异。结果:与单独使用GnRH类似物治疗相比,通过自我报告的症状评分或治愈率的显著改善来评估,腹腔镜下透热治疗,无论是单独使用还是联合GnRH类似物治疗,与明显更好的结果相关(相对危险度2.36,95%可信区间(CI) 1.38-4.02)。根据临床评估,手术治疗组出现明显改善或治愈的可能性是单独接受GnRH类似物治疗组的2.52倍(相对危险度2.52,95% CI 1.54-4.14)。在腹腔镜随访中,手术组71%的患者有改善或治愈,而内科组为49%。结论:根据患者报告的症状和6个月随访时的临床表现评估,结果显示,子宫内膜异位症患者接受保守手术,无论是单独治疗还是联合GnRH类似物治疗,其明显改善或治愈的可能性至少是单独接受GnRH类似物治疗的患者的两倍。
Comparison between medical treatment by GnRH analogue (goserelin) and conservative surgery by laparoscopic diathermy for the management of endometriosis
Objective
To compare the effectiveness of medical treatment of endometriosis with conservative surgical treatment, either alone or combined with medical treatment.
Gynaecology Department at Benenden Hospital, Kent, UK.
Patients
98 women proven laparoscopically to have endometriosis which was staged using the Revised American Fertility Society Classification (rAFS).
Interventions
The first group underwent medical treatment with the GnRH analogue, goserelin (3.6 mg depot) and the second group was treated using laparoscopic diathermy. Some members of the second group who had endometriomas and stage IV endometriosis (AFS classification) also had GnRH analogue in addition to laparoscopic diathermy. There was no statistically significant difference between the age, parity and severity of symptoms of the groups.
Main outcome measures
Variations in patient-reported symptoms, physician-recorded clinical examination and in second-look laparoscopic findings, in each group, 6 months after treatment completion.
Results
Treatment with laparoscopic diathermy, either alone or in combination with GnRH analogue, was associated with a significantly better outcome, as assessed by a self-report of marked improvement in symptom score or cure, compared with treatment with GnRH analogue alone (relative risk 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38–4.02). The surgical treatment group were also 2.52 times more likely to show either marked improvement or cure, as judged by clinical assessment, than the group of patients who received GnRH analogue alone (relative risk 2.52, 95% CI 1.54–4.14). There was an improvement or cure in 71% of patients in the surgical group, when assessed laparoscopically at follow up, compared with 49% in the medical group.
Conclusion
The results showed that patients with endometriosis receiving conservative surgery, either alone or in combination with GnRH analogue, were at least two times more likely to have either marked improvement or cure, as assessed by patient-reported symptoms and clinical findings at 6-month follow up, than those who received GnRH analogue alone.