MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.5144/0256-4947.2016.292

Медицинская библиотека · Annals of Saudi medicine · 2016

Laryngopyocele: report of a rare case and systematic review.

Al-Yahya Syarifah N, Baki Marina Mat, Saad Sakina Mohd, Azman Mawaddah, Mohamad Abdullah Sani

Клинический случайСтатьяСистематический обзорПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

UNLABELLED: A systematic review on laryngopyoceles across Ovid, PubMed, and Google Scholar database was conducted. A total of 61 papers published between 1952 and 2015 were found. Of these, 23 cases written in English, which described the number of cases, surgical approaches, resort to tracheostomy, complications, and outcomes, were shortlisted. Four cases of laryngopyoceles were managed endoscopically using a cold instrument, microdebrider, or laser. Eighteen cases were operated via an external approach, and 1 case applied both approaches. One of 4 endoscopic and 10 of 18 external approaches involved tracheostomy. The present study aimed to report a case of large mixed laryngopyocele that was successfully drained and marsupialized endoscopically using suction diathermy without requiring tracheostomy. Management using suction diathermy for excision and marsupialization of a laryngopyocele has never been reported and can be recommended as a feasible method due to its widespread availability. In the presence of a large laryngopyocele impeding the airway, tracheostomy may be averted in a controlled setting.

SIMILAR CASES PUBLISHED: None specified.

Для цитирования: Al-Yahya Syarifah N, Baki Marina Mat, Saad Sakina Mohd, Azman Mawaddah, Mohamad Abdullah Sani. Laryngopyocele: report of a rare case and systematic review.. Annals of Saudi medicine. 2016. DOI: 10.5144/0256-4947.2016.292.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.