Suppr超能文献

鼻中隔手术患者中鼻内鼻中隔夹板与鼻腔填塞物的比较研究

Comparative study of intranasal septal splints and nasal packs in patients undergoing nasal septal surgery.

作者信息

Wadhera Raman, Zafar Naushad, Gulati Sat Paul, Kalra Vijay, Ghai Anju

机构信息

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Pt. Bhagwat Dayal Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, 6/8FM, Medical Enclave, Rohtak-124001, Haryana, India.

出版信息

Ear Nose Throat J. 2014 Sep;93(9):396-408.

Abstract

We conducted a prospective, comparative, interventional study to evaluate the role of intranasal septal splints and to compare the results of this type of support with those of conventional nasal packing. Our study population was made up of 60 patients, aged 18 to 50 years, who had undergone septoplasty for the treatment of a symptomatic deviation of the nasal septum at our tertiary care referral hospital. These patients were randomly divided into two groups according to the type of nasal support they would receive: 30 patients (25 men and 5 women, mean age: 23.3 yr) received bilateral intranasal septal splints and the other 30 (26 men and 4 women, mean age: 22.4 yr) underwent anterior nasal packing. Outcomes parameters included postoperative pain and a number of other variables. At 24 and 48 hours postoperatively, the splint group had significantly lower mean pain scores (p < 0.05). At 48 hours, the splint group experienced significantly fewer instances of nasal bleeding (p < 0.01), swelling over the face and nose (p < 0.01), watering of the eyes (p < 0.01), nasal discharge (p = 0.028), nasal obstruction (p < 0.001), and feeding difficulty (p = 0.028). Likewise, mean pain scores during splint or pack removal were significantly lower in the splint group (p < 0.01). At the 6-week follow-up, only 2 patients (6.7%) in the splint group exhibited a residual deformity, compared with 8 patients (26.7%) in the packing group (p = 0.038). Finally, no patient in the splint group had an intranasal adhesion at follow-up, while 4 (13.3%) in the packing group did (p < 0.05). We conclude that intranasal septal splints result in less postoperative pain without increasing postoperative complications, and thus they can be used as an effective alternative to nasal packing after septoplasty.

摘要

我们进行了一项前瞻性、对比性、干预性研究,以评估鼻内中隔夹板的作用,并将这种支撑方式的结果与传统鼻腔填塞的结果进行比较。我们的研究对象为60例年龄在18至50岁之间的患者,他们在我们的三级医疗转诊医院因有症状的鼻中隔偏曲接受了鼻中隔成形术。这些患者根据将接受的鼻腔支撑类型随机分为两组:30例患者(25名男性和5名女性,平均年龄:23.3岁)接受双侧鼻内中隔夹板,另外30例(26名男性和4名女性,平均年龄:22.4岁)进行前鼻孔填塞。结果参数包括术后疼痛及其他一些变量。术后24小时和48小时,夹板组的平均疼痛评分显著更低(p<0.05)。在48小时时,夹板组鼻出血(p<0.01)、面部和鼻部肿胀(p<0.01)、流泪(p<0.01)、鼻分泌物(p=0.028)、鼻塞(p<0.001)及进食困难(p=0.028)的情况显著更少。同样,夹板组在取出夹板或填塞物期间的平均疼痛评分也显著更低(p<0.01)。在6周随访时,夹板组只有2例患者(6.7%)出现残余畸形,而填塞组有8例患者(26.7%)出现(p=0.038)。最后,夹板组在随访时无患者出现鼻内粘连,而填塞组有4例患者(13.3%)出现(p<0.05)。我们得出结论,鼻内中隔夹板可减少术后疼痛且不增加术后并发症,因此可作为鼻中隔成形术后鼻腔填塞的有效替代方法。

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