聚焦超声与射频消融治疗常年变应性鼻炎疗效对比观察

Comparative study of treatment of focused ultrasound and radiofrequency ablation for perennial allergic rhinitis

目的比较聚焦超声与射频消融治疗变应性鼻炎（AR）的临床疗效及术后不良反应有无差异。方法将100例在我院采用射频消融术及59例采用聚焦超声治疗的AR患者纳入研究,用记分法评定疗效,用计数法比较术后不良反应。结果术后随访12个月,聚焦超声组有效率分别为：1周94.92%,1个月98.31%,12个月100.00%;射频消融组效率分别为：1周99.00%,1个月99.00%,12个月97.00%。两种方法在年龄（t=0.63,P=0.15）、性别（χ^2=0.21,P=0.65）及族别（χ^2=5.43,P=0.25）上无统计学差异,两种方法疗效上无明显差距。术后不良反应：两种治疗方法在术后1周出现水肿、分泌物伪膜、干痂有统计学差异,聚焦超声组优于射频消融组,术后1个月聚焦超声组在鼻腔出血、干痂优于射频消融组。结论聚焦超声术与射频消融术两种物理方法治疗AR均有效,疗效相当,在术后不良反应上聚焦超声术优于射频消融术。

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and postoperative adverse reactions between the focused ultrasound and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.Methods 100 cases treated by radiofrequency ablation and 59 cases treated by focused ultrasound were included in this study.Scoring method was used to evaluate the efficacy and counting method was used to evaluate postoperative adverse reactions.Results There were no significant differences in age（t=0.63,P=0.15）,gender（χ~2=0.21,P=0.65）and nationality（χ~2=5.43,P=0.25）between the two groups.During postoperative follow-up 12 months,the efficiency of focused ultrasound group were 94.92%,98.31%,and 100.00% in 1 week,1 month and 12 months respectively,while the efficiency of radiofrequency ablation group were 99.00%,99.00% in and 97.00%.There were no differences in the efficiency between two groups.Postoperative adverse reactions：Focused ultrasound group were better than radiofrequency ablation group in edema,secretions pseudomembrane and dry scab postoperative 1 month and in nasal cavity bleeding and dry scab postoperative 1 month.ConclusionBoth focused ultrasound treatment and radiofrequency ablation treatment were equally effective in the treating allergic rhinitis.Focused ultrasound was better than radiofrequency ablation treatment in postoperative adverse reactions.