检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]齐齐哈尔医学院第二附属医院耳鼻喉科,齐齐哈尔161006
出 处:《中国眼耳鼻喉科杂志》2010年第5期298-299,共2页Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology and Otorhinolaryngology
摘 要:目的探讨不同喉显微手术术式治疗声带息肉的疗效。方法将206例声带息肉患者随机分成两组,分别采用微瓣技术和传统显微切除技术切除病变组织;于术后7d、1个月、5个月观察声带及嗓音恢复情况。结果所有采取声带微瓣技术治疗的病例均一次切除病变,未发现残留,痊愈率达92%(116/126);采用传统显微切除技术治疗的患者,其痊愈率仅35%(28/80),两组痊愈率差异有统计学意义(Z=-8.547,P=0.000)。采用声带微瓣技术治疗者嗓音质量也优于采用传统显微切除技术治疗者。结论微瓣技术治疗声带息肉既可彻底切除病变,又能很好地保留黏膜的完整性,是治疗声带息肉的最佳手术方式。Objective To explore the effect of different mlerosurgical method on the treatment of vocal polyps. Methods Two hundred and six patients with vocal polyps were randomly divided into two groups. Micro flap technique ( 126 cases) and traditional microsurgieal resection technique( 80 cases) was performed respectively. The recovery of vo- cal cords and voice was observed at 7 days, one month and five months after the surgery respectively. Results The le- sion was excised at one time in patients adopting the micro flap technique and no residual was found, with the cure rate reaching 92% (116/126). While the cure rate in the other group was only 35% which was significantly different from that in the microflap technique group. Patients receiving the micro flap technique acquired superior quality of voice than the other group. Conclusions Use of micro flap technique could not only excise the polyps thoroughly but also retain the integrity of mucous membrane. It was the best surgical method for the treatment of vocal polyps. ( Chin J Ophthalmol and Otorhinolaryngol,2010,10:298-299)
分 类 号:R767[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.145