• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[局部或全身麻醉下鼻骨骨折复位。一项回顾性患者满意度调查]

[Reposition of nose fractures under local or general anaesthesia. A retrospective patient satisfaction survey].

作者信息

Koch Klaus U, Gano Lars, Kjeldsen Anette D

机构信息

Odense Universitetshospital, Øre-, naese-, Halskirurgisk Afdeling F.

出版信息

Ugeskr Laeger. 2007 Jun 11;169(24):2322-5.

PMID:17594850
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Nose fractures are the most common among facial fractures. A well-approved treatment of isolated nose fractures is closed reposition under local or general anaesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 150 patients who were treated with closed reposition for simple and isolated nose fracture at the Otorhinolaryngology Department of Odense University Hospital during the period 1 January 2003 until 31 December 2004. The case records were retrospectively examined and the patients were sent a questionnaire and were offered outpatient follow-up.

RESULTS

The most frequent cause of damage was violence. The average interval from trauma to treatment was 4.1 days. 60% of the patients filed cosmetic results equal to or better than before fracturing the nose regardless of the anaesthetic procedure, while 69% of the patients experienced the function of the nose as equal to or better than before.

CONCLUSION

The majority of nose fractures are treated under local anaesthesia. A follow-up at least 1 year later found no difference between patient satisfaction of cosmetic and functional results of the nose, regardless of whether they had local or general anaesthesia. In general, the patients were satisfied with the anaesthesia, whether it was local or general.

摘要

引言

鼻骨骨折是面部骨折中最常见的。一种广泛认可的单纯鼻骨骨折治疗方法是在局部或全身麻醉下进行闭合复位。

材料与方法

本研究纳入了2003年1月1日至2004年12月31日期间在欧登塞大学医院耳鼻喉科接受单纯鼻骨骨折闭合复位治疗的150例患者。对病例记录进行回顾性检查,并向患者发送问卷,提供门诊随访。

结果

损伤的最常见原因是暴力。从受伤到治疗的平均间隔时间为4.1天。无论麻醉方式如何,60%的患者获得了与鼻骨骨折前相当或更好的美容效果,而69%的患者感觉鼻子功能与骨折前相当或更好。

结论

大多数鼻骨骨折在局部麻醉下进行治疗。至少1年后的随访发现,无论患者接受的是局部麻醉还是全身麻醉,他们对鼻子美容和功能效果的满意度没有差异。总体而言,患者对麻醉方式(无论是局部麻醉还是全身麻醉)都感到满意。

相似文献

1
[Reposition of nose fractures under local or general anaesthesia. A retrospective patient satisfaction survey].[局部或全身麻醉下鼻骨骨折复位。一项回顾性患者满意度调查]
Ugeskr Laeger. 2007 Jun 11;169(24):2322-5.
2
Reduction of nasal bone fractures: a comparative study of general, local, and topical anesthesia techniques.鼻骨骨折复位:全身麻醉、局部麻醉和表面麻醉技术的比较研究
J Craniofac Surg. 2009 Mar;20(2):382-4. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31819b945f.
3
Nasal fracture reduction: local versus general anaesthesia.鼻骨骨折复位:局部麻醉与全身麻醉
Rhinology. 2007 Mar;45(1):83-8.
4
Fractured-nose reduction under local anaesthesia. Is it acceptable to the patient?局部麻醉下的鼻骨骨折复位术。患者能接受吗?
Rhinology. 1992 Jun;30(2):89-96.
5
A randomised trial comparing local versus general anaesthesia for microwave endometrial ablation.一项比较微波子宫内膜切除术局部麻醉与全身麻醉的随机试验。
BJOG. 2003 Sep;110(9):799-807.
6
Satisfaction with cosmesis following nasal manipulation: do previous fractures matter?鼻部手术后对美容效果的满意度:既往骨折有影响吗?
J Laryngol Otol. 2006 Sep;120(9):749-52. doi: 10.1017/S0022215106001083.
7
Reduction of nasal fractures under local anaesthetic.局部麻醉下鼻骨骨折复位术
Rhinology. 2001 Mar;39(1):43-6.
8
[Nasal bone fracture: etiology, diagnostics, treatment and complications].[鼻骨骨折:病因、诊断、治疗及并发症]
Laryngorhinootologie. 2009 Nov;88(11):711-6. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1224106. Epub 2009 Jun 26.
9
Local versus general anaesthesia with Prolene Hernia System mesh for inguinal hernia repair: early and long-term outcomes.使用普理灵疝修补装置网片进行腹股沟疝修补时局部麻醉与全身麻醉的比较:早期和长期结果
Dig Surg. 2008;25(5):347-50. doi: 10.1159/000159623. Epub 2008 Oct 3.
10
Manipulation of nasal bone fractures under local anaesthetic.局部麻醉下鼻骨骨折整复术
Ir Med J. 2003 Feb;96(2):50-1.