摘要
目的评估聚氨酯凝胶头圈摆体位与Mayfield头架辅助摆体位在枕下乙状窦后入路听神经瘤切除术中对患者面部压伤的影响。方法回顾性分析2013年1月-2014年1月侧俯卧位下通过显微外科手术治疗的90例听神经瘤患者临床资料及术中护理资料,其中28例予以聚氨酯凝胶头圈摆体位(A组),62例予以Mayfield头架摆体位(B组),就两种摆体位方法对患者面部压伤情况进行比较。结果 A组出现5例异常(2例下侧额颧部、下颌部处皮肤压伤,2例下侧眼结膜水肿,1例同时合并下侧颧部皮肤压伤和下侧眼结膜水肿),压伤率为17.86%;B组出现1例下颌部皮肤压伤,压伤率为1.61%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=5.778,P=0.016)。结论枕下乙状窦后入路听神经瘤切除术中,Mayfield头架辅助摆体位可以较好的避免对患者面部的压伤。
Objective To assess the effect of polyurethane gelatum grommet positioning and Mayfield head holder positioning under suboccipital retrosigmoid approach in acoustic neuroma resection on patients＇ facial crushing.Methods Retrospective analysis of the clinical and nursing data of 90 patients treated by microsurgical surgery under the lateral prone position in our hospital from January 2013 to January 2014 was carried out.Patients in group A（n= 28） were given grommet positioning,while those in group B（n= 62） were given Mayfield head holder positioning,and then we compared the situation of facial crushing between the two groups.Results In group A,5 patients showed abnormality including 2 cases of skin injury in lower frontozygomatic and mandibular area,2 cases of lower conjunctival edema and 1 of co-existing skin injury in lower zygomatic area and lower conjunctival edema,and the crushing rate was 17.86 % in group A.In group B,the crushing rate was 1.61 % with one case of mandibular skin injury.There was a significant difference between the two groups（χ2 = 5.778,P= 0.016）.Conclusion Under suboccipital retrosigmoid approach for acoustic neuroma resection,Mayfield head holder positioning is better to avoid facial crushing.
出处
《华西医学》
CAS
2015年第7期1285-1287,共3页
West China Medical Journal
