MedElevator
Войти в исследования Ear, nose, & throat journal · 2020
Current Treatment Options for Patulous Eustachian Tube: A Review of the Literature.
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.
Koltsidopoulos Petros, Skoulakis Charalampos
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Patulous Eustachian tube (PET) is a clinical condition that is associated with troublesome aural symptoms and is difficult to be treated successfully. The purpose of this review is to examine the published literature regarding the therapeutic value of the current treatment options for PET.
METHODS: We searched Web of Science, PubMed and Medline from 1999 to 2019. The search focused on papers concerning the clinical evaluation of treatment methods in PET patients. Statistical techniques were not used.
RESULTS: Prospective and retrospective case series were the types of trials available for review. We included 28 articles that evaluated the efficacy of various conservative and surgical therapeutic options. The recovery rates ranged from 50% to 100%. In most studies the assessment of efficacy was based on the subjective improvement of patient symptoms as there is no validated outcome tool available. No severe adverse events were observed in any study.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of the available literature, it seems that conservative treatments can be considered as a primary therapeutic option for PET. Concerning the surgical interventions they seem to be a safe and valuable solution in patients with refractory disease. Finally, given the low level of evidence, prospective case-control studies with long follow-up and robust setting looking into the therapeutic approach of PET are required. The need for establishment of standard criteria of PET recovery should be underlined.
METHODS: We searched Web of Science, PubMed and Medline from 1999 to 2019. The search focused on papers concerning the clinical evaluation of treatment methods in PET patients. Statistical techniques were not used.
RESULTS: Prospective and retrospective case series were the types of trials available for review. We included 28 articles that evaluated the efficacy of various conservative and surgical therapeutic options. The recovery rates ranged from 50% to 100%. In most studies the assessment of efficacy was based on the subjective improvement of patient symptoms as there is no validated outcome tool available. No severe adverse events were observed in any study.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of the available literature, it seems that conservative treatments can be considered as a primary therapeutic option for PET. Concerning the surgical interventions they seem to be a safe and valuable solution in patients with refractory disease. Finally, given the low level of evidence, prospective case-control studies with long follow-up and robust setting looking into the therapeutic approach of PET are required. The need for establishment of standard criteria of PET recovery should be underlined.