The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2017
Surgical Management of Dysphagia Due to Anterior Cervical Osteophytes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Erdur Ömer, Taşli Hamdi, Polat Bahtiyar, Sofiyev Fuad, Tosun Fuat, Çolpan Bahar, Birkent Hakan, Öztürk Kayhan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The present study was performed to share personal experiences and to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of anterior cervical osteophytes surgical procedures.
METHODS: The operative records of anterior cervical osteophytes patients who did not benefit from conventional treatments and underwent osteophytectomy were analyzed retrospectively. Transoral and transcervical anterolateral methods were applied, considering both the localization of the osteophyte and the patient's preference.
RESULTS: Five patients were operated with the transcervical anterolateral method, and 3 patients were operated with the transoral procedure. Those using the transcervical method were likely to encounter complications, however, being comfortable for patients. Although the transoral procedure is much safer, the patients may face postoperative pain, long healing time, and morbidities as hematoma, cervical instability, and infection after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Both transcervical and transoral methods will improve the functional swallowing pathologies and decrease aspiration-penetration. Transoral approach is not recommended due to slow healing times and postoperative pain, although it creates easier access to the spine.
METHODS: The operative records of anterior cervical osteophytes patients who did not benefit from conventional treatments and underwent osteophytectomy were analyzed retrospectively. Transoral and transcervical anterolateral methods were applied, considering both the localization of the osteophyte and the patient's preference.
RESULTS: Five patients were operated with the transcervical anterolateral method, and 3 patients were operated with the transoral procedure. Those using the transcervical method were likely to encounter complications, however, being comfortable for patients. Although the transoral procedure is much safer, the patients may face postoperative pain, long healing time, and morbidities as hematoma, cervical instability, and infection after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Both transcervical and transoral methods will improve the functional swallowing pathologies and decrease aspiration-penetration. Transoral approach is not recommended due to slow healing times and postoperative pain, although it creates easier access to the spine.