支撑喉镜和电子喉镜下声带息肉摘除术的临床效果  

Comparative analysis of the clinical effect of supporting laryngoscope and electronic laryngoscope vocal cord polyp extirpation

作　　者：李小群[1] 王春雷[1] 戚乐[2] 

机构地区：[1]浙江省瑞安市人民医院耳鼻喉科,浙江瑞安325200 [2]杭州市第二人民医院耳鼻喉科,浙江杭州310015

出　　处：《中国现代医生》2015年第7期41-43,47,共4页China Modern Doctor

基　　金：浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(2011KYB068);浙江省温州市科技计划项目(Y20120291)

摘　　要：目的比较分析支撑喉镜和电子喉镜下不同类型声带息肉摘除术的临床疗效。方法选取我院近年来收治的128例声带息肉患者,随机分为支撑喉镜组和电子喉镜组两组,每组64例,分别行支撑喉镜和电子喉镜子下声带息肉摘除术,术后随访3个月,对比分析两组的临床疗效。结果支撑喉镜和电子喉镜下行声带息肉摘除术都具有较高的有效率,但电子喉镜下行带蒂息肉摘除的有效率高于支撑喉镜组,同时电子喉镜组术后软腭的损伤率也低于支撑喉镜组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论支撑喉镜和电子喉镜子下声带息肉摘除术均具有较好的临床疗效,各有优势,临床中应根据患者具体情况选择合适的手术方式。Objective To compare the clinical effect of supporting laryngoscope and electronic laryngoscope under different types of vocal cord polyp extirpation. Methods In our hospital in recent years, 128 cases of vocal cord polyp were randomly divided into self retaining laryngoscope group and electronic laryngoscope group, 64 cases in each group, respectively, excised the vocal cord polyp by supporting laryngoscope and electronic laryngoscope surgery, postoperative follow-up of 3 months, clinical curative effects of two groups were compared. Results The supporting laryngoscope and electronic laryngoscope had higher efficiency, but the effective rate of electronic laryngoscope downward pedicle polyps laryngoscope group was higher than that of the supporting laryngoscope group, the damage rate and electronic laryngoscope group was also lower than the supporting laryngoscope group, the difference had statistical significance（ P〈0.05）.Conclusion The both ways all have better clinical effect, each has advantages,we should choose suitable operation mode according to the specific situation.

关 键 词：支撑喉镜 电子喉镜 声带息肉 临床疗效 

分 类 号：R767.91[医药卫生—耳鼻咽喉科]