首页> 外文期刊>European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology: Official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) >Comparison of the result of consolidative technique otoplasty and incisionless otoplasty in the repairs of prominent ears
【24h】

Comparison of the result of consolidative technique otoplasty and incisionless otoplasty in the repairs of prominent ears

机译:巩固技术耳整形术和无切口耳整形术在突出耳部修复中的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

We aimed to compare the long-term results of complications of consolidative technique otoplasty (CTO) and incisionless otoplasty (IO). The study consists of 156 patients who were operated between 2006 and 2015. According to surgical techniques, these patients were divided into two groups as IO group and CTO group. The distance between the head and the ear was assessed by measuring the four points preoperatively and postoperatively (SUP: most superior helical point, SCA: superior conchal attachment, ICA: inferior conchal attachment, and lobule). Early and late postoperative complications, operative time were recorded. 128 ears in IO group, 163 ears in CTO group were prominent. When postoperative SUP, SCA, ICA, lobule values for right and left ears in both groups were statistically evaluated, it was found that CTO technique has led to significantly greater improvement compared to the IO technique (p < 0.001). The success rate in IO technique and CTO technique was 72 and 96 %, respectively. Early complications were similar in both groups. The late period complication determined much more frequently was seen in the IO group. Concerning operative time, it was identified as significantly lower in the IO group (p < 0.001). The early-term outcomes of both techniques were similar; however, the complication rates due to suture material and needed for revision in IO technique were higher whereas CTO technique was more permanent with lower complication risks.
机译:我们的目的是比较合并技术耳成形术(CTO)和无切口耳成形术(IO)并发症的长期结果。该研究包括2006年至2015年间手术的156例患者。根据手术技术,这些患者分为IO组和CTO组两类。通过测量术前和术后四个点来评估头与耳之间的距离(SUP:最上螺旋点,SCA:上共生附着,ICA:下共生附着和小叶)。记录术后早期和晚期并发症,手术时间。 IO组为128耳,CTO组为163耳。当对两组的术后SUP,SCA,ICA,右耳和左耳小叶值进行统计学评估时,发现与IO技术相比,CTO技术带来了显着更大的改善(p <0.001)。 IO技术和CTO技术的成功率分别为72%和96%。两组的早期并发症相似。在IO组中发现的晚期并发症更为常见。关于手术时间,在IO组中被确定为明显更低(p <0.001)。两种技术的早期结果相似。然而,由于缝合材料和IO技术的修订所需的并发症发生率较高,而CTO技术则更为持久,并发症风险较低。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号