两种外耳道胆脂瘤手术方法的临床疗效比较

目的 比较耳内镜下和显微镜下治疗外耳道胆脂瘤的手术效果。方法 回顾性分析2015年1月-2019年12月该院44例外耳道胆脂瘤患者的临床资料，根据不同手术方法，将患者分为观察组和对照组，观察组在耳内镜下清理胆脂瘤，对照组在显微镜下清理胆脂瘤。比较两组患者的临床疗效。结果 两组患者术后均得到治愈，听力不同程度提高。两组患者手术前后，言语频率听阈气骨导差比较，差异均有统计学意义（t=19.71、t=13.41,P <0.05），观察组手术时间较对照组短，术后局部不适感较对照组轻，差异均有统计学意义（t=-3.68、t=-2.44,P <0.05）。所有患者术后随访6个月，均干耳，无复发。结论 耳内镜下治疗外耳道胆脂瘤，手术方法简单，效果优于显微镜，值得临床推广应用。

Comparison of clinical effect of two methods for cholesteatoma of external auditory canal

Objective To compare the surgical results of cholesteatoma of external auditory canal under the otoscope and the microscope.Methods Clinical data of 44 patients with cholesteatoma from January 2015 to December 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the operation mode, the patients were divided into observation group and control group. The cholesteatoma in the observation group was cleaned under the otoscope, and the cholesteatoma in the control group was cleaned under the microscope. The clinical effects of the two groups were compared.Results The patients in both groups were cured and their hearing was improved in different degrees. Compared with the control group, the difference of speech frequency hearing threshold between the observation group and the control group was statistically significant (t = 19.71, t = 13.41, P < 0.05). The operation time of the observation group was short than that of the control group, and the local discomfort of the observation group was lighter than that of the control group after operation, which was statistically significant (t = -3.68, t = -2.44, P < 0.05). All the patients were followed up for 6 months with dry ears and no recurrence.Conclusion Endoscopic treatment of cholesteatoma of external auditory canal is simple and effective, which is worthy of clinical application.