CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探讨经耳内镜下选择耳垂脂肪压片法进行鼓膜修补手术的临床疗效及安全性。方法随机将我院耳鼻喉科收治的100例需进行鼓膜修补术的患者分成观察组（52例）和对照组（48例），观察组进行耳内镜下鼓膜修补术、对照组行显微镜下鼓膜修补术，比较两组患者手术出血量、手术时间、听力恢复、伤口愈合情况。结果观察组手术时间、术中出血量分别为（11.5±3.5）min、（8.2±2.2）mL，均明显低于对照组的（44.3±3.8）min、（18.5±1.8）mL，两组两种观察组指标比较差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组术后3个月复查，有效率达94.23%，对照组有效率达93.75%，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；两组听阈值在手术前比较差异无统计学（P＞0.05），两组治疗后与治疗前分别进行组内比较，听力均明显加强且差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；治疗后两组比较，治疗组的听力恢复要优于对照组且差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论经耳内镜下选择耳垂脂肪压片法进行鼓膜修补手术具有较好的疗效，同时听力恢复更好、手术时间及出血量更少。
목적：탐토경이내경하선택이수지방압편법진행고막수보수술적림상료효급안전성。방법수궤장아원이비후과수치적100례수진행고막수보술적환자분성관찰조（52례）화대조조（48례），관찰조진행이내경하고막수보술、대조조행현미경하고막수보술，비교량조환자수술출혈량、수술시간、은력회복、상구유합정황。결과관찰조수술시간、술중출혈량분별위（11.5±3.5）min、（8.2±2.2）mL，균명현저우대조조적（44.3±3.8）min、（18.5±1.8）mL，량조량충관찰조지표비교차이균유통계학의의（P＜0.05）；관찰조술후3개월복사，유효솔체94.23%，대조조유효솔체93.75%，차이무통계학의의（P＞0.05）；량조은역치재수술전비교차이무통계학（P＞0.05），량조치료후여치료전분별진행조내비교，은력균명현가강차차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）；치료후량조비교，치료조적은력회복요우우대조조차차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。결론경이내경하선택이수지방압편법진행고막수보수술구유교호적료효，동시은력회복경호、수술시간급출혈량경소。
Objective To explore the clinical efficacy and safety of the myringoplasty with pressed lobule fat-patch under ear endoscope. Methods In Dongguan Liaobu hospital, 100 patients of myringoplasty were randomly divided into the observation group (52 cases) and the control group (48 cases). The observation group was given the treatment of myringoplasty with pressed lobule fat-patch under ear endoscope. The control group was given the treatment of Microscopic myringoplasty. The operation bleeding volume, operation time, recovery of hearing, wound healing difference of two groups patients were compared. Results Operation time and operation bleeding volume in the observation group were (11.5±3.5)min and (8.2±2.2)mL respectively, significantly lower than those in the control group (44.3±3.8)min, (18.5±1.8)mL. After three months, two kinds of observation measures in two groups were significant difference (P<0.05). The effective rate of the observation group was 94.23%,while the control group was 93.75%, the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Before the operation,the difference of hearing thresholds between two groups was not statistically (P > 0.05). Preoperative hearing thresholds and postoperative hearing thresholds were compared in two groups, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). After operation, recovery of hearing of observation group was superior to that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion Myringoplasty with pressed lobule fat-patch under ear endoscope is good effect, and can be better restore hearing, less operation time and blood loss.