Suppr超能文献

经中隔缝合的另一个优点:缩短麻醉后苏醒时间。

Another advantage of the transseptal suture: shortens the duration of waking up after anesthesia.

作者信息

Karataş Duran, Yüksel Fatih, Doğan Murat, Sentürk Mehmet

机构信息

From the Ear Nose Throat, Melikgazi Medical Center, Kayseri, Turkey.

出版信息

J Craniofac Surg. 2014 Mar;25(2):602-3. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000000685.

Abstract

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of transseptal suturing against 3 different types of nasal packings with respect to pain, operating time, and postoperative complications after nasal septal surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred twenty-eight patients (aged between 18 and 58 y) undergoing nasal septal surgery were included in the study. After surgery, 4 types of nasal packing were used: (1) transseptal suturing (group A: 57 patients), (2) internal nasal splint (group B: 57 patients), (3) Merocel standard 8-cm packing without airway (group C: 57 patients), and (4) soft paraffin gauze dressing (group D: 57 patients).

RESULTS

Regarding the mean operating time, there was no statistically significant difference among groups B, C, and D (P > 0.05). However, when the operating times observed in the said 3 groups were compared with those observed in group A, the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The mean (SD) postoperative pain score within 1 to 48 hours was 2.9 (1.3; median, 2) in group A, 6.3 (1.4; median, 6) in group B, 7.5 (1.1; median, 7) in group C, and 7.7 (1.8; median, 7) in group D. Starting from the postoperative 48th hour, internal nasal splint, Merocel packing, and soft paraffin gauze dressing were significantly more painful compared with transseptal suturing (P < 0.05). When compared with the other groups, extubation period and postoperative care unit stay were shorter in the transseptal suturing group (P < 0.05). Regarding infection, hematoma, synechia, or perforation, there was no statistically significant difference among the groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Transseptal suturing technique is a useful alternative to packing, with only a minor increase in operating time. Particularly, transseptal suturing shortens extubation time and postoperative care unit stay.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在探讨鼻中隔缝合术与3种不同类型鼻腔填塞物相比,在鼻中隔手术后对疼痛、手术时间及术后并发症的影响。

患者与方法

本研究纳入228例接受鼻中隔手术的患者(年龄在18至58岁之间)。术后使用4种鼻腔填塞物:(1)鼻中隔缝合术(A组:57例患者),(2)鼻内夹板(B组:57例患者),(3)无气道的Merocel标准8厘米填塞物(C组:57例患者),以及(4)软石蜡纱布敷料(D组:57例患者)。

结果

关于平均手术时间,B组、C组和D组之间无统计学显著差异(P>0.05)。然而,将上述3组观察到的手术时间与A组观察到的手术时间进行比较时,差异具有统计学显著性(P<0.05)。术后1至48小时的平均(标准差)疼痛评分在A组为2.9(1.3;中位数,2),B组为6.3(1.4;中位数,6),C组为7.5(1.1;中位数,7),D组为7.7(1.8;中位数,7)。从术后第48小时开始,鼻内夹板、Merocel填塞物和软石蜡纱布敷料与鼻中隔缝合术相比疼痛明显更严重(P<0.05)。与其他组相比,鼻中隔缝合术组的拔管期和术后监护病房停留时间更短(P<0.05)。关于感染、血肿、粘连或穿孔,各组之间无统计学显著差异(P>0.05)。

结论

鼻中隔缝合术是一种有用的填塞替代方法,仅使手术时间略有增加。特别是,鼻中隔缝合术缩短了拔管时间和术后监护病房停留时间。

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