探讨仿生物理电刺激治疗对人工终止妊娠术后子宫内膜修复的临床效果。

选择2017年1月至2018年6月，于淮安市妇幼保健院行人工终止妊娠术的100例患者为研究对象。按照随机数字表法，将其分为观察组(n＝50，采用仿生物理电刺激治疗)和对照组(n＝50，采用口服屈螺酮炔雌醇治疗)。观察2组患者一般临床资料，治疗前、后子宫内膜厚度，子宫螺旋动脉搏动指数(PI)及阻力指数(RI)。本研究符合2013年修订的《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言》要求，并且通过淮安市妇幼保健院伦理委员会审批(审批文号：2016008)。

①2组患者年龄、人工终止妊娠术次数、人体质量指数(BMI)等比较，差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。②观察组患者治疗后子宫内膜厚度为(9.8±2.8) mm，对照组为(8.0±2.5) mm，2组比较，差异有统计学意义(t＝7.012，P＝0.007)。此外，观察组和对照组患者治疗前、后子宫内膜厚度分别组内比较，差异均有统计学意义(t＝15.619、12.952，P<0.001、<0.001)。③观察组患者治疗后，子宫螺旋动脉PI及RI分别为1.0±0.1、0.7±0.1，显著高于对照组的0.9±0.1、0.6±0.1，并且差异有统计学意义(t＝4.106、2.028，P＝0.003、0.016)。观察组和对照组组内治疗前、后子宫螺旋动脉PI、RI比较，差异均有统计学意义(观察组组内比较：t＝3.261、12.432, P＝0.010、<0.001；对照组组内比较：t＝3.065、10.307, P＝0.021、<0.001)。

仿生物理电刺激治疗修复子宫内膜效果优于口服屈螺酮炔雌醇治疗。由于本研究仅为回顾性研究，该技术在临床推广应用价值，还需要大样本、多中心随机对照试验研究、证实。

To explore clinical effects of bioelectric stimulation on endometrial repair after artificial termination of pregnancy.

From January 2017 to June 2018, a total of 100 patients who underwent artificial termination of pregnancy in Huai′an Women and Children Health Hospital were selected as research subjects. According to the random number table method, they were divided into observation group (n=50, treated with bioelectric stimulation) and control group (n=50, treated with oral drospirenone ethinyl estradiol). The general clinical data, endometrial thickness, uterine spiral artery pulsatility index (PI) and resistance index (RI) were observed before and after treatment. This study complies with the requirements of the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association revised in 2013, and was approved by the Ethics Committee of Huai′an Women and Children Health Hospital (Approval No. 2016008). Informed concent was obtained from each participates.

① There were no significant differences between two groups in the aspects of age, times of artificial termination of pregnancy and body mass index (BMI) (P>0.05). ② After treatment, the endometrial thickness of observation group was (9.8±2.8) mm, which was thicker than that of control group (8.0±2.5) mm, and the difference was statistically significant (t=7.012, P=0.007). In addition, there were significant differences in endometrial thickness before and after treatment of observation group and control group, respectively (t=15.619, 12.952, P<0.001, <0.001). ③ After treatment, PI and RI of uterine spiral artery of observation group were 1.0±0.1 and 0.7±0.1, respectively, which were significantly higher than those of control group (0.9±0.1 and 0.6±0.1, respectively), and the difference between two groups was statistically significant (t=4.106、2.028, P=0.003, 0.016). In addition, there were significant difference in PI and RI of uterine spiral artery before and after treatment of observation group and control group, respectively (observation group: t=3.261, 12.432, P=0.010, <0.001; control group: t=3.065, 10.307, P=0.021, <0.001).

The effect of bioelectric stimulation on endometrial repair was better than that of oral drospiroone ethinylestradiol treatment. Because this study is just a retrospective study, the clinical application value of this technology needs to be confirmed by the results of large sample, multicenter and randomized controlled study.