微创医学

【摘要】目的探讨采用不同方案治疗射精管梗阻性无精症患者后其配偶妊娠结局的差别。方法94例射精管梗阻性无精症患者，其中24例采用经尿道射精管切开术(TURED)治疗(TURED组)，70例采用卵胞浆内单精子显微注射（ICSI）助孕治疗（试管组）。对两组患者治疗后其配偶的妊娠率及活产率进行对比研究。结果TURED组治疗后其配偶临床妊娠率为41.67%（10/24），试管组为62.85%（44/70）；TURED组活产率为33.33%（8/24），试管组为55.71%（39/70）；TURED组流产率为8.33%（2/24），试管组为11.36%（8/70）；两组比较，差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论TURED与ICSI治疗射精管梗阻性无精症患者，其配偶的妊娠结局无明显差别。

【Abstract】 ObjectiveTo investigate the difference in the pregnant outcome of patients′ spouses among different therapeutic regimens for azoospermia secondary to ejaculatory duct obstruction. MethodsA total of 94 patients with azoospermia secondary to ejaculatory duct obstruction, 24 patients (TURED group) with proximal ejaculatory duct obstruction underwent transurethral resection of the ejaculatory duct (TURED), and 70 patients (ICSI group) with distal ejaculatory duct obstruction received assisted reproductive therapy using intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The pregnancy rate of spouses and live birth rate after treatment were compared between the two groups. ResultsThe clinical pregnancy rates of the TURED group and ICSI group were 41.67%（10/24）and 62.85%（44/70）respectively. The live birth rates of the TURED group and ICSI group were 33.33%（8/24） and 55.71%（39/70）respectively. The miscarriage rates of the TURED group and ICSI group were8.33%（2/24）and 11.36%（8/70）respectively. There were no significant differences in the indices above between the two groups（P＞0.05）. ConclusionNo difference in the pregnant outcome of the spouses exists between TURED and ICSI for the treatment of patients with azoospermia secondary to ejaculatory duct obstruction.

无