经鼻内窥镜与传统鼻中隔成型术比较  

A Comparison of Nasoseptal Reconstruction with Endoscopic and Traditional Approach

作　　者：张勤修[1] 覃刚[1] 安会明[1] 刘世喜[1] 梁传余[1] 

机构地区：[1]四川大学华西医院耳鼻咽喉科,四川成都610041

出　　处：《华西医学》2006年第2期227-228,共2页West China Medical Journal

基　　金：四川省卫生厅2004年科研项目(编号:040126)

摘　　要：目的比较经鼻内窥镜下(简称内镜组)与传统鼻中隔成型术的优缺点。方法回顾性分析方法。内镜组21例,传统组32例。结果手术时间内镜组平均40min,而传统组平均45min。术中出血量内镜组平均30ml;而传统组平均35ml。术中疼痛内镜组8例,占38%,而传统组13例,占40%。高位偏曲矫正满意度内镜组6例,占高位偏曲例数的100%;而传统组4例,占67%。总体矫正满意度内镜组19例,占90%;而传统组28例,占87·5%。经统计学检验,两组在手术时间、术中出血量、总体矫正满意度等方面均无显著差异,但在高位偏曲病例方面,内镜组显示出较明显优势。结论总体手术效果方面两组均能获得满意效果,但在处理高位、后段偏曲,同时行慢性鼻窦炎手术以及鼻中隔结节的处理上,经鼻内窥镜手术优于传统组。Objective： To compare, the advantages and disadvantages of nasoseptal reconstruction between endoscopic and tradional approach. Methods： To review 21 cases of the endoscopic group and 32 cases of the tradional group. Results, In the endoscopic group, the operating time was 40 minutes, the amount of bleeding was 30ml, the incidence of pain was 38%, the satisfacton correcting of the upper nasoseptal deviation was 100% and the total rate of satisfaction was 90%, while in traditional group, they were 45 minutes, 35ml, 40%, 67% and 87.5%, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the operating time, the amount of bleeding and the total satisfaction between the two groups. But in the cases of upper nasal sepral deviation the endoscopic group had obvious advantages than the tradional group. Conclusion： Two groups both had good effect in the totalsatisfaction. But the endoscopic nasoseptal reconstruction had good illumination and modern operational instuments, so it has more advantages over the tradional methods in dealing with the upper and posterior septal deviation and in the treatment of chronic sinusitis and septal nodule of the same time.

关 键 词：鼻内窥镜 鼻中隔偏曲 

分 类 号：R765[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]