Suppr超能文献

微创与标准人工耳蜗植入:一项对比研究。

Minimal access and standard cochlear implantation: a comparative study.

作者信息

Prager Jeremy D, Neidich Marci J, Perkins Jonathan N, Meinzen-Derr Jareen, Greinwald John H

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.

出版信息

Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 Aug;76(8):1102-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.04.008. Epub 2012 May 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the operative times and complications between patients who underwent minimal access cochlear implantation and standard technique cochlear implantation.

METHODS

Patients who underwent unilateral cochlear implantation by a single surgeon from 2001 to 2010. The minimal access technique of an approximately 2.5-3 cm post-auricular incision with creation of subperiosteal pocket for the device was compared to the longer standard "S" incision into the scalp (~8-10 cm) with bone well creation and suture fixation. Outcomes include operative times and complications.

RESULTS

There were 122 unilateral implants, 73 (59.8%) in the minimal access group and 49 (40.2%) in the standard group. Mean total time in the operating room was lower in the minimal access group compared to the standard group (200±31 vs. 255±49 min, p<.0001) as well as mean operative time (149.5±28 vs. 200±45 min, p<.0001 respectively). There were 17 complications in the entire cohort with 8 and 9 complications in the minimal and standard groups respectively. Of the 17 complications, 12 were surgical technique-specific. Although it appeared that there were higher rates of major, technique-specific, and overall complications in the standard access group, these differences did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing minimal access cochlear implantation require shorter operative times when compared to the standard access cochlear implantation. In addition, low complication rates are observed for major, technique-specific, and overall complications. Minimal access cochlear implantation may be considered an equivalent and potentially superior technique.

摘要

目的

比较接受微创人工耳蜗植入术和标准技术人工耳蜗植入术患者的手术时间及并发症情况。

方法

选取2001年至2010年由同一位外科医生进行单侧人工耳蜗植入的患者。将约2.5 - 3厘米耳后切口并为植入设备创建骨膜下腔隙的微创技术,与更长的标准“S”形头皮切口(约8 - 10厘米)并创建骨槽及缝合固定的技术进行比较。观察指标包括手术时间和并发症。

结果

共进行了122例单侧植入手术,其中微创组73例(59.8%),标准组49例(40.2%)。微创组的平均总手术室时间低于标准组(200±31分钟 vs. 255±49分钟,p <.0001),平均手术时间也较低(149.5±28分钟 vs. 200±45分钟,p <.0001)。整个队列中有17例并发症,微创组和标准组分别有8例和9例。在这17例并发症中,12例与手术技术相关。虽然标准入路组的主要、技术相关和总体并发症发生率似乎更高,但这些差异未达到统计学意义。

结论

与标准入路人工耳蜗植入术相比,接受微创人工耳蜗植入术的患者手术时间更短。此外,主要、技术相关和总体并发症的发生率较低。微创人工耳蜗植入术可被视为一种等效且可能更优的技术。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验