Revue de laryngologie - otologie - rhinologie · 2002
[Value of interventional video-endoscopy in the assessment of cancer of the upper airways and digestive system].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Folia M, Woisard V, Uro-Coste E, Serrano E, Pessey J J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to evaluate the video fiberoscope with operator canal (FOC) in he diagnosis of head and neck carcinoma compared to direct laryngoscopy (DL).
METHODOLOGY: From August 2000 to May 2001, 82 patients were included in a prospective study. They were examined for pharyngolaryngeal cancer with the FOC, DL and a CAT-SCAN. The compared elements were the visualization of the different regions of the pharyngolarynx. A three dimensional description of the lesion, the presence of secondary localisations as well as the anatomo pathological results were obtained with FOC and DL.
RESULTS: Although the pharyngolarynx is less well visualized in FOC than in DL (p = 0.04), no statistically significant difference was found between the two methods in terms of visual diagnosis and assessment of the extent of the lesion. The sensitivity of the biopsies made with FOC is lower than those performed with DL (66% FOC, 97% DL). Moreover, we have noted that FOC is highly reliant on the experience and ability of the surgeon.
CONCLUSION: DL remains the most reliable technique for the exploration and diagnosis of the pharyngolarynx. If it is not possible to perform a DL or if it is not indicated (trismus, contra-indication to general anaesthesia) FOC should be considered as the examination of choice.
METHODOLOGY: From August 2000 to May 2001, 82 patients were included in a prospective study. They were examined for pharyngolaryngeal cancer with the FOC, DL and a CAT-SCAN. The compared elements were the visualization of the different regions of the pharyngolarynx. A three dimensional description of the lesion, the presence of secondary localisations as well as the anatomo pathological results were obtained with FOC and DL.
RESULTS: Although the pharyngolarynx is less well visualized in FOC than in DL (p = 0.04), no statistically significant difference was found between the two methods in terms of visual diagnosis and assessment of the extent of the lesion. The sensitivity of the biopsies made with FOC is lower than those performed with DL (66% FOC, 97% DL). Moreover, we have noted that FOC is highly reliant on the experience and ability of the surgeon.
CONCLUSION: DL remains the most reliable technique for the exploration and diagnosis of the pharyngolarynx. If it is not possible to perform a DL or if it is not indicated (trismus, contra-indication to general anaesthesia) FOC should be considered as the examination of choice.