CO_2激光与喉显微手术治疗声带息肉的疗效对比

目的 比较ＣＯ２激光与喉显微手术治疗声带息肉的治疗效果。方法 ６０例声带息肉患者分为激光组和喉显微手术组，每组各３０例。患者手术后行间接喉镜声带检查、嗓音声学分析、主观听觉评价分析。结果激光组术后声带形态的恢复时间要长于喉显微手术组；激光组术后声学参数中的ＰＰＱ值大于而Ｈ／Ｎ值小于显微手术组；激光组术后的嗓音主观听觉评价以粗糙型和紧张型为主，而喉显微手术组仅以粗糙型为主。结论 对声带息肉的治疗喉显微手术方法优于激光手术，喉显微手术较激光手术对组织损伤小，术后愈合时间短，术后嗓音恢复快，同时也减轻了患者的经济负担。

Observation of Vocal Polyps Treated with CO_2 Laser and Laryngeal Microsurgery

Objective The present study aimed at the effect observation of vocal polyps treated with CO2 laser and laryngeal microsurgery. Methods The subjects were 60 patients, 30 were treated by CO2 laser and 30 by laryngeal microsurgery. A set of tests had been routinely used for vocal polyp patients in this study. The tests included(1) indirect laryngoscopic examination,(2)voice analysis: PPQ(pitch perturbation quotient), APQ(amplitude perturbation quotient), H/N(harmonics to noise ratio).(3)psychoacoustic evaluation: GRBAS method: Grade(G), Rough(R), Breathy(B), Asthenic(A), Strained(S). Results After operation, the recovery time of vocal cord for CO2 laser treated group was longer than that in the laryngeal microsurgery group. The acoustic parameters PPQ for CO2 laser group were larger than that in the laryngeal microsurgery group, moreover H/N values were smaller than that in laryngeal microsurgery group. The psychoacoustic evaluation for CO2 laser group was rough and strained, and for laryngeal microsurgery group was only rough. Conclusion The curative effect of laryngeal microsurgery is definite. Microsurgery is better than CO2 laser when recovery time and vocal function improvement are considered.