论文部分内容阅读
输卵管性不孕症(TFI)的筛查与诊断对于后续治疗方案及预后起着至关重要的作用。目前临床上常用子宫输卵管碘油造影(HSG)、腹腔镜检查、腹腔镜联合宫腔镜检查等途径评估输卵管情况。输卵管的评估结果对于TFI患者诊治方案的制定具有极大的参考价值,但目前世界上缺乏一致的评分系统,如:Hulka输卵管评分系统、r-AFS分期系统、输卵管盆腔病变分度、Hull&Rutherford评估系统、输卵管损害分级、EMs生育指数(EFI)术中探查评分,本研究组也于1990年提出了输卵管评分系统,如此多的评分系统,众说纷纭,各有优劣,尚需更多的研究加以证实。
Tubal infertility (TFI) screening and diagnosis of follow-up treatment programs and prognosis plays a crucial role. At present, commonly used in clinical hysterosalpingography (HSG), laparoscopy, laparoscopic hysteroscopy and other ways to assess tubal conditions. The results of tubal assessment have great reference value for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with TFI. However, there is a lack of consistent scoring system in the world such as Hulka tubal scoring system, r-AFS staging system, fallopian tube pelvic lesion indexing, Hull & Rutherford evaluation system , Tubal damage classification, EMs fertility index (EFI) intraoperative exploration score, the research team also proposed in 1990 tubal scoring system, so many scoring system, different opinions, each has its own advantages and disadvantages, still need more studies to confirm .