经耳内镜鼓膜切开与耳内镜鼓膜穿刺治疗中耳炎的疗效比较

A comparison between clinical effects of otoendoscopy-guided tympanostomy and myringocentesis on otitis media with effusion

目的分析比较经耳内镜鼓膜切开与耳内镜鼓膜穿刺治疗分泌性中耳炎的疗效,探讨合适的治疗方法。方法将100例分泌性中耳炎患者随机分为鼓膜切开药物灌洗治疗组(切开组)与穿刺药物灌洗治疗组(穿刺组),比较两组患者的听力恢复时间、鼓膜颜色恢复时间、气导阈值和治愈率。结果切开组患者的听力恢复时间和鼓膜颜色恢复时间均早于穿刺组患者(P<0.01),前者的气导阈值亦比后者小(P<0.01);鼓膜切开组的显效率高于穿刺治疗组(P<0.05)。结论经耳内镜鼓膜切开术治疗分泌性中耳炎的效果优于耳内镜鼓膜穿刺术。

Objective To explore a better way to treating otitis media with effusion （OME） by comparing the clinical effects of myringotomy and puncture of tympanum on OME. Methods One hundred cases of OME were randomly divided into two groups. Fifty cases （55 ears） were treated with otoendoscopy-guided tympanostomy combined with medication and the others （56 ears） received tympanic puncture combined with medication. Hearing recovery time, improving time of tympanic appearances, air conduction threshold and curing rate were compared between the two groups. Results Both hearing recovery and tympanic improvement in the tympanostomy group were earlier than those of the myringocentesis group（ P 〈 0.01 ）. Air conduction threshold of the former was lower than that of the later（ P 〈0.01 ）. The obvious effective rate of the tympanostomy group was significantly higher than that of the myringocentesis group （ P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Therapeutic effect of otoendoscopy-guided tympanostomy combined with medication is better than that of the myringocentesis.