双气囊硅胶导管治疗后鼻孔出血的疗效观察

Effect evaluation of double-balloon catheter in the management of posterior epistaxis

关键词:  气囊止血  后鼻孔出血  填塞治疗  疗效

Key words:  [Key words]　hemostasis with gasbag  posterior epistaxis  packing treatment  curative effect

摘要:

目的　观察双气囊硅胶止血导管治疗后鼻孔出血的疗效。　方法　　对2011年1月-2012年6月门急诊就诊的112例明确为后鼻孔出血患者进行治疗，行双气囊硅胶止血导管治疗62例（导管组），凡士林油纱条常规前后鼻孔填塞治疗50例（凡士林组），观察患者疼痛、通气和止血效果。每项指标设定5 个级别，根据3 项主要指标评分分析其疗效差异。 　结果　　鼻腔硅胶双气囊通气止血导管和凡士林油纱条均有明显的止血效果，两者差异无显著性意义（P>0.05），但在治疗过程中，鼻腔硅胶双气囊通气止血导管在保持鼻腔通气和减轻疼痛方面（平均评分分别为97.42和91.77）优于凡士林油纱条（平均评分分别为1.60和21.80）（P<0.05）。　结论　　应用双气囊硅胶止血导管治疗后鼻孔出血方便简单，副作用少，效果确实可靠，并且兼顾了保持患者鼻腔通气和减轻疼痛等问题，提升了后鼻孔出血患者治疗期间的生活质量。

Abstract:

[Abstract] Objective　To evaluate the effect of double-balloon catheter in the management of epistaxis. 　Methods　One hundred and twelve cases of the patients suffering from posterior epistaxis were treated, who visited the emergency department during the period from January, 2011 to June, 2012. Among them, 62 cases were treated with double-balloon catheter (the experimental group), and 50 cases were treated with the conventional vaseline oil gauze (the controlled group). The patients' pain, ventilation and the hemostatic effect were observed. There were 5 levels for each indicator and the difference in effect was analyzed according to 3 main indicators. 　Results　Both the two methods have obvious hemostatic effects, the difference with no statistic significance (P>0.05). But in the process, the method of double-balloon catheter is better than that of vaseline oil gauze in matters of keeping nasal ventilation and relieving the pain (P<0.05). 　Conclusion　This study highlights that double- balloon catheter provided a more simple and convenient way of packing with less side effect and reliable effect. Meanwhile, it took into account the issues such as the patients' nasal ventilation and pain relief, then improved the patients' life quality when being treated.