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]内蒙古医学院第一附属医院皮肤性病科,内蒙古呼和浩特010050
出 处:《内蒙古医学院学报》2003年第4期246-248,共3页Acta Academiae Medicinae Neimongol
摘 要:目的 :比较电离子机及微波仪治疗不同性质皮肤病的优缺点。方法 :分别用电离子机和微波仪治疗4种面部皮肤病 ,1 mo后随访并记录一次性治愈率及是否留有瘢痕。结果 :对于色素痣 ,微波仪的治愈率明显优于电离子机 ( P <0 .0 1 )。对于睑黄斑瘤 ,则电离子机明显优于微波仪 ( P <0 .0 1 )。对治疗后是否形成瘢痕 ,两种仪器间无差异 ( P>0 .0 5 )。结论 :两种仪器对治疗不同性质的皮肤病各有所长。Objective: To compare the merits and demerits of treating the facial dermatosis by electric ion operating apparatus and microwave apparatus. Methods: Electric ion operating apparatus and microwave apparatus were used respectively so as to treat four kinds of facial dermatosis. After one month,the patients were followed up and calculated the cure rate and about scar formation. Results: For pigmented nevus, the cure rate of microwave apparatus was obviously superior to electric ion operating apparatus (P<0.01). For palpebral xanthelasma,electric ion operating apparatus was obviously superior to microwave apparatus (P<0.01),There were not significant difference between two groups about the scar formation (P>0.05). Conclusion: The two kinds of apparatus possess different merits for treating the different facial dermatosis.
分 类 号:R751.05[医药卫生—皮肤病学与性病学]
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:216.73.216.28