文章摘要
李 红,祝 康,袁 婕,温晓妮,刘远新.经鼓膜穿刺与肌肉注射鼠神经生长因子对突发性耳聋的治疗效果对比[J].,2019,19(13):2453-2456
经鼓膜穿刺与肌肉注射鼠神经生长因子对突发性耳聋的治疗效果对比
Comparison of the Effect of Tympanic Membrane Puncture and Intramuscular Injection of Rat Nerve Growth Factor in the Treatment of Sudden Deafness
投稿时间:2018-11-26  修订日期:2018-12-23
DOI:10.13241/j.cnki.pmb.2019.13.011
中文关键词: 鼓膜穿刺  肌肉注射  鼠神经生长因子  突发性耳聋
英文关键词: Tympanic membrane puncture  Intramuscular injection  Rat nerve growth factor  Sudden deafness
基金项目:陕西省自然科学基金项目(2011JQ4022)
作者单位E-mail
李 红 西安体育学院健康科学系 陕西 西安 710068 lihong19751100@163.com 
祝 康 西安交通大学第二附属医院耳鼻喉科 陕西 西安 710004  
袁 婕 陕西省人民医院神经内科 陕西 西安 710068  
温晓妮 西安体育学院运动医学教研室 陕西 西安 710068  
刘远新 西安体育学院运动医学教研室 陕西 西安 710068  
摘要点击次数: 31
全文下载次数: 43
中文摘要:
      摘要 目的:对比分析经鼓膜穿刺与肌肉注射鼠神经生长因子对突发性耳聋的治疗效果。方法:选择2014年1月~2016年12月在西安体育学院健康科学系进行诊治的75例突发性耳聋患者,将所有患者随机分为鼓膜穿刺组(n=37例)和肌肉注射组(n=38例)。肌肉注射组患者采用肌肉注射的方法给予鼠神经生长因子治疗,每次20μg,每天1次;鼓膜穿刺组患者采用经鼓膜穿刺方法给予治疗鼠神经生长因子治疗,每次20 μg,每天1次。两组均治疗14 d。比较两组的临床治疗效果、治疗前后纯音听阈值的变化及不良反应的发生情况。结果:治疗后,鼓膜穿刺组痊愈9例,显效14例,有效22例,无效3例,有效率为91.89% (34/37),明显高于肌肉注射组[73.68% (28/38)](P<0.05);两组纯音听阈值均与治疗前相比均明显降低(P<0.05),且鼓膜穿刺组明显低于肌肉注射组(P<0.05)。两组突发性耳聋患者治疗过程中均未出现明显的不良反应。结论:经鼓膜穿刺鼠神经生长因子治疗突发性耳聋的临床效果明显优于肌肉注射,且安全性较高。
英文摘要:
      ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the clinical effect of tympanic membrane puncture and intramuscular injection of rat nerve growth factor in the treatment of sudden deafness. Methods: 75 cases of patients with sudden deafness who were treated in Xi' an Physical Education University from January 2011 to December 2016 were selected and randomly divided into the tympanic membrane puncture group (n=37 case) and the intramuscular injection group (n=38 case). The intramuscular injection group was treated with intramuscular injection rat nerve growth factor, while the tympanic membrane puncture group was treated with tympanum puncture, 20 μg each time, 1 times a day. The clinical therapeutic effects, changes of pure tone threshold before and after treatment, and the incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results: After treatment, the effective rate of observation group was 91.89% (34/37), which was significantly higher than that of the control group[73.68%(28/38)](P<0.05); the pure tone hearing thresholds of both groups were significantly improved compared with those before treatment (P<0.05), which was significantly better in the tympanic membrane puncture group than that of the intramuscular injection group (P<0.05). There was no obvious adverse reactions in the two groups during the treatment. Conclusion: The clinical effect of mural puncture and mouse nerve growth factor on the sudden deafness is superior to that of the intramuscular injection, and the safety is high.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭