Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2015
[The evaluation of nasal ventilation in allergic rhinitis patients after nasal provocation].
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Lu Hanqiang, Jiang Huaping, Rong Caixia, Huang Qiusheng
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate nasal ventilation in allergic rhinitis patients after nasal provocation with acoustic rhinometry.
METHOD: Twenty AR cases were selected. Each one was assessed for the nasal cavity volumes (NCV), nasal airway resistance (NR), nasal minimal cross-section area (NMCA) and distance of nasal minimal cross-section area from nostril (DCAN) by using acoustic rhinometry before and after nasal provocation 1 hour and 6 hours later. The results were statistically analyzed.
RESULT: After nasal provocation 1 hour 1 later, NCV and NR had a significant difference compared with before nasal provocation(P<0. 05), but NMCA and DCAN had no difference (P > 0.05). After 6 hours later, NCV, NR, NMCA and DCAN had a significant difference compared with before nasal provocation (P < 0.05). NCV,NR,DCAN had a significant difference between 1 hour later and 6 hours later after provocation (P < 0.05), while NMCA had no difference (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The nasal ventilation in allergic rhinitis after nasal provocation had declined over time.
METHOD: Twenty AR cases were selected. Each one was assessed for the nasal cavity volumes (NCV), nasal airway resistance (NR), nasal minimal cross-section area (NMCA) and distance of nasal minimal cross-section area from nostril (DCAN) by using acoustic rhinometry before and after nasal provocation 1 hour and 6 hours later. The results were statistically analyzed.
RESULT: After nasal provocation 1 hour 1 later, NCV and NR had a significant difference compared with before nasal provocation(P<0. 05), but NMCA and DCAN had no difference (P > 0.05). After 6 hours later, NCV, NR, NMCA and DCAN had a significant difference compared with before nasal provocation (P < 0.05). NCV,NR,DCAN had a significant difference between 1 hour later and 6 hours later after provocation (P < 0.05), while NMCA had no difference (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The nasal ventilation in allergic rhinitis after nasal provocation had declined over time.