摘要
目的：比较Nasalpacking（NP）鼻腔填塞材料与传统鼻腔填塞材料对顽固性鼻出血治疗的疗效。方法：制定顽固性鼻出血的诊断标准，并以此标准对312例鼻出血病人随机分为两组，分别用NP材料和传统鼻腔填塞进行止血处理。结果：NP材料在治愈率和好转率上与传统材料有统计学的差异（P＜0.05）。结论：NP材料与传统鼻腔填塞材料对顽固性鼻出血均有良好疗效。而NP材料具有操作简便、病人痛苦、并发症少等特点。可作为治疗顽固性鼻出血的首选填塞材料。
To compare the Nasal packing material with the traditional material in the treatment of stubborn epistaxis. Methods: A diagnostic standard had been made. 312 cases of epistaxis were randondy divided into two groups, and treated with the Nasal packing material and traditional material respective1y. Results: Between the Nasal packing maerial and traditional material, the effect of cure showed statistical difference (P < O. O5 ). Conclusion:The Nasal packing material and traditional material both have an active effect on stubbern epistaxis. But the Nasal packing material is more convenient and causes less pain and complications in use. It can be the first choice for the trearment of epistaxis.
出处
《中国耳鼻咽喉颅底外科杂志》
CAS
1999年第3期163-165,共3页
Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology-skull Base Surgery
关键词
鼻腔填材料
顽固性
鼻出血
治疗
Nasal packing material
Traditional material
Stubborn epistaxis
