CLINICAL EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT SURGICAL METHODS IN CONGENITAL PREAURICULAR FISTULA SURGERY.

Q4 Medicine
Georgian medical news Pub Date : 2024-11-01
Hui-Xiu Luo, Shu Zhu, Jing-Chuan Wang
{"title":"CLINICAL EFFICACY OF DIFFERENT SURGICAL METHODS IN CONGENITAL PREAURICULAR FISTULA SURGERY.","authors":"Hui-Xiu Luo, Shu Zhu, Jing-Chuan Wang","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the clinical efficacy of different surgical methods in congenital preauricular fistula surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>60 patients with congenital preauricular fistula were selected and randomly divided into a microscope group of 30 cases and a macroscopic group of 30 cases. The microscope team used the fistula separation method to perform surgery along with the fistula opening. In the macroscopic group, en bloc resection was performed using the helix crus cartilage, superficial temporalis fascia and parotid capsule as boundaries. Analyze the efficacy of the two surgical methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After more than one year of follow-up, 29 of the 30 cases in the macroscopic group were cured and 1 case improved, with wound dehiscence and scar healing occurring. All cases in the microscopy group were cured. There was no recurrence after surgery in both groups. After the chi-sqaure test, the results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. The operation time in the naked eye group was shorter, but the postoperative incision healing in the microscopic group was more beautiful and scars were less obvious.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both macroscopic en bloc resection and microscopic fistula separation can effectively cure preauricular fistula. However, the operation time in the naked eye group was shorter, while the postoperative incisions in the microscopic group were more beautiful, and the scars were less obvious.</p>","PeriodicalId":12610,"journal":{"name":"Georgian medical news","volume":" 356","pages":"141-143"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgian medical news","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of different surgical methods in congenital preauricular fistula surgery.

Methods: 60 patients with congenital preauricular fistula were selected and randomly divided into a microscope group of 30 cases and a macroscopic group of 30 cases. The microscope team used the fistula separation method to perform surgery along with the fistula opening. In the macroscopic group, en bloc resection was performed using the helix crus cartilage, superficial temporalis fascia and parotid capsule as boundaries. Analyze the efficacy of the two surgical methods.

Results: After more than one year of follow-up, 29 of the 30 cases in the macroscopic group were cured and 1 case improved, with wound dehiscence and scar healing occurring. All cases in the microscopy group were cured. There was no recurrence after surgery in both groups. After the chi-sqaure test, the results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. The operation time in the naked eye group was shorter, but the postoperative incision healing in the microscopic group was more beautiful and scars were less obvious.

Conclusion: Both macroscopic en bloc resection and microscopic fistula separation can effectively cure preauricular fistula. However, the operation time in the naked eye group was shorter, while the postoperative incisions in the microscopic group were more beautiful, and the scars were less obvious.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Georgian medical news
Georgian medical news Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
207
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信