...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Otology and neurotology: official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology >Subperiosteal temporal pocket versus standard technique in cochlear implantation: a comparative clinical study.
【24h】

Subperiosteal temporal pocket versus standard technique in cochlear implantation: a comparative clinical study.

机译：人工耳蜗植入中的叶片下颞袋与标准技术：一项比较临床研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVE: In the standard technique of cochlear implantation, the internal receiver-stimulator (IRS) is fixed into a socket drilled on the calvarial bone. In the subperiosteal technique, the IRS is fixed under the subperiosteal plane, and drilling is not necessary. The purpose of this study was to compare the subperiosteal and the standard techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center; cochlear implant program. PATIENTS: One hundred forty-eight patients who underwent cochlear implantation. INTERVENTION: The researcher who evaluated the patients was not informed which of the 2 techniques was used on the patients and administered a visual analog scale (VAS) analysis. The duration of the operation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and migration of the IRS were assessed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A VAS survey was administered to the patients or to their parents to evaluate the practicability of the implant. RESULTS: The duration of the operation was 73.4 +/- 17.8 minutes in the subperiosteal group and 105.5 +/- 17.8 minutes in the standard technique group. The difference was statistically significant. Intracranial complications or migration of the IRS was also not observed in any patient. The VAS score was 4.2 +/- 2.1 in the standard group and 4.3 +/- 1.9 in the subperiosteal group. The difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The subperiosteal technique can be safely and effectively used in cochlear implantation. Not only are there no intracranial complications and no migration of IRS was observed but also the mean operation time is reduced up to 30% and none of the patients have reported difficulty with fixing of the external device.
机译：目的：在人工耳蜗植入的标准技术中，内部接收器刺激器（IRS）固定在钙骨质骨上的插座中。在下有层技术中，IRS固定在下有骨平面下，无需钻孔。这项研究的目的是比较下孔和标准技术。研究设计：回顾性临床研究。设置：三级推荐中心;人工耳蜗植入计划。患者：一百四十八名接受人工耳蜗的患者。干预措施：评估患者的研究人员未通知患者使用两种技术中的哪一项，并进行了视觉模拟量表（VAS）分析。评估了操作，术中和术后并发症的持续时间以及IRS的迁移。主要结果指标：对患者或父母进行了VAS调查，以评估植入物的实用性。结果：在层面层组中，操作持续时间为73.4 +/- 17.8分钟，标准技术组为105.5 +/- 17.8分钟。差异在统计上很重要。在任何患者中也未观察到颅内并发症或IRS的迁移。在标准组中，VAS得分为4.2 +/- 2.1，在层层组中为4.3 +/- 1.9。差异在统计上不显着。结论：可安全有效地用于耳蜗植入中的骨膜下技术。不仅没有颅内并发症，也没有观察到IRS的迁移，而且平均操作时间也减少了30％，并且没有报告过固定外部装置的困难。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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