Li H L, Zhang Z F, Xie M X, Ren T L, Wang W Q
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the Second People's Hospital of Kashi, Kashi, 844000, China.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, EENT Hospital of Fudan University.
Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2017 Jul 5;31(13):1021-1024. doi: 10.13201/j.issn.1001-1781.2017.13.013.
The intraoperative and postoperative clinical indexes of myringoplasty performed by endoscope or by microscope were collected retrospectively, the differences between the two different surgical methods were analysized. Retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 70 cases (70 ears) udergoing myringoplasty in the department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, at the Second People's Hospital of Kashi from June 2014 to August 2015. According to the surgical approach cases were divided into two groups, 30 cases in group A by endoscopic myringoplasty and 40 cases in group B by microscope myringoplasty. The operation time, blood loss, postoperative dry ear time, wound healing scar hyperplasia, tympanic membrane perforation rate and hearing improvement rate were compared between the two groups, and SPSS 19.0 statistical software was used to analyze the differences between the two groups. The operation time: Group A had an average of (35.23±6.38)min, less than group B (42.60±7.97)min, with statistical difference (<0.05). The intraoperative blood loss: the average of group A was (7.33±2.11)ml, less than group B (17.93±3.84)ml, with statistical difference (<0.05). The postoperative dry ear time more than 1 month: group A was 40%, lower than Group B (75%), with statistical difference (<0.05). The postoperative incision healing scar hyperplasia: group A was 0%, lower than group B (5%), no significant difference (>0.05). The tympanic membrane perforation rate: group A was 3.33%, lower than group B (7.5%), no significant difference (>0.05). The postoperative hearing improvement rate: group A was 76.67%, lower than group B (80.00%), no significant difference (>0.05). Compared with the traditional microscope surgery, endoscopic myringoplasty is a minimally invasive surgical technique which can get the same curative effect, but with a shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, dry ear in shorter time , recovery more quickly, beautiful incision and other advantages. So it is worthy of clinical application.
回顾性收集经内镜或显微镜行鼓膜成形术的术中及术后临床指标，分析两种不同手术方法之间的差异。回顾性分析2014年6月至2015年8月喀什地区第二人民医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科收治的70例行鼓膜成形术患者（70耳）的临床资料。根据手术方式将病例分为两组，A组30例行内镜下鼓膜成形术，B组40例行显微镜下鼓膜成形术。比较两组的手术时间、出血量、术后干耳时间、伤口愈合瘢痕增生情况、鼓膜穿孔率及听力改善率，采用SPSS 19.0统计软件分析两组间差异。手术时间：A组平均为（35.23±6.38）min，短于B组（42.60±7.97）min，差异有统计学意义（<0.05）。术中出血量：A组平均为（7.33±2.11）ml，少于B组（17.93±3.84）ml，差异有统计学意义（<0.05）。术后干耳时间超过1个月：A组为40%，低于B组（75%），差异有统计学意义（<0.05）。术后切口愈合瘢痕增生：A组为0%，低于B组（5%），差异无统计学意义（>0.05）。鼓膜穿孔率：A组为3.33%，低于B组（7.5%），差异无统计学意义（>0.05）。术后听力改善率：A组为76.67%，低于B组（80.00%），差异无统计学意义（>0.05）。与传统显微镜手术相比，内镜下鼓膜成形术是一种微创手术技术，可获得相同疗效，但具有手术时间短、术中出血量少、干耳时间短、恢复快、切口美观等优点。因此值得临床应用。
