介入栓塞手术与鼻内镜下电凝止血治疗鼻出血的临床疗效比较研究  

Comparison of clinical efficacy of embolization and endoscopic coagulation treatment on rhinorrhagia

作　　者：徐明录[1] 秦顺朵[1] 

机构地区：[1]鹤壁职业技术学院护理学院,河南鹤壁458030

出　　处：《现代预防医学》2012年第7期1846-1847,1850,共3页Modern Preventive Medicine

摘　　要：目的比较介入栓塞手术与鼻内镜下电凝止血治疗鼻出血的临床疗效。方法选择既往于某院治疗的顽固性鼻出血患者112例,42例接受鼻内镜下电凝止血的患者设为观察组,余70例接受介入栓塞手术的患者为对照组,对比分析其治疗效果及视觉模拟评分法(VAS)。结果观察组患者治愈41例(97.6%),对照组为49(70.0%),明显高于对照组(P﹤0.05);观察组有1例复发(2.4%),对照组有21例复发(30.0),明显低于对照组的复发率(P﹤0.05);术中VAS观察组(8.02±1.01)较对照组为低(8.92±1.12)(P﹤0.05);术后VAS评分观察组(4.78±1.11)较对照组明显较低(7.96±1.03)(P﹤0.05)。结论使用鼻内镜电凝止血的患者较介入栓塞的患者治愈率较高,复发率较低,患者术中感觉良好。OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical efficacy of embolization and endoscopic coagulation treatment on rhinorrhagia.METHODS 112 patients of rhinorrhagia were selected,and 42 cases receiving endoscopic coagulation were divided to the observation group,and the rest of 70 cases receiving embolization were divided to the control group.The treatment effect and visual analog scale were compared and analyzed.RESULTS There were 41 patients cured in the observation group（97.6%）,which was higher than that of the control group 49（70.0%）（P﹤0.05）;1 case had recurrence（2.4%）in the observation group which was lower than that of the control group 21（30.0%）（P﹤0.05）;Intraoperative VAS（8.02±1.01）was lower than that of the control group（8.92±1.12）（P﹤0.05）;Postoperative VAS（4.78±1.11）was lower than that of the control group（7.96±1.03）（P﹤0.05）.CONCLUSION The curing rate of endoscopic coagulation is higher than the embolization,the recurrence rate is lower,and intraoperative patients feel good.

关 键 词：介入栓塞 鼻内镜 电凝止血 鼻出血 临床疗效 

分 类 号：R765.23[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]