Undersea & hyperbaric medicine : journal of the Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society, Inc · 2015
Is there a difference between active opening of the Eustachian tube in a hypobaric surrounding compared to a hyperbaric surrounding?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Mikolajczak Stefanie, Meyer Moritz Friedo, Felsch Moritz, Jumah Masen Dirk, Hüttenbrink Karl-Bernd, Grosheva Maria, Luers Jan-Christoffer, Beutner Dirk
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The Eustachian tube (ET) is the key to pressure equalization between the middle ear and ambient pressure. To date, little is known about differences of the opening mechanisms under hyper- or hypobaric conditions. Aim of this study was to compare standard ET opening parameters during standardized hypo- and hyperbaric exposures.
METHODS: Thirty healthy participants were exposed to a standardized profile of decompression and compression (SPDC) in a hypo-/hyperbaric pressure chamber. Impedance, expressed as tympanic membrane compliance, was recorded at intervals during the excursions from 1 atmosphere absolute (atm abs) to 0.8 and 1.2 atm abs respectively. Parameters for tubal opening were obtained during SPDC: ET opening pressure (ETOP), ET opening duration (ETOD) and ET opening frequency (ETOF), hypobaric (Phase 1) and hyperbaric (Phase 2) data were compared.
RESULTS: Mean value for Valsalva maneuver ETOP was 40.10 ± 19.02 mbar in Phase 2 vs. 42.82 ± 21.75 mbar in Phase 1. For ETOD it was 2.80 ± 2.09 seconds in Phase 2 vs. 2.51 ± 1.90 seconds in Phase 1. For swallowing, mean value for ETOP was 33.47 ± 14.50 mbar in Phase 2 vs. 28.44 ± 14.04 in Phase 1. ETOD was 0.82 ± 0.60 seconds in Phase 2 vs. 0.76 ± 0.55 seconds in Phase 1. There was no statistical significance for ETOP, ETOD and ETOF between the two phases.
CONCLUSION: No statistical significant difference was evident for active pressure equalization (Valsalva and swallowing) between a hyperbaric setting (dive) and a hypobaric setting (flight) in healthy subjects.
METHODS: Thirty healthy participants were exposed to a standardized profile of decompression and compression (SPDC) in a hypo-/hyperbaric pressure chamber. Impedance, expressed as tympanic membrane compliance, was recorded at intervals during the excursions from 1 atmosphere absolute (atm abs) to 0.8 and 1.2 atm abs respectively. Parameters for tubal opening were obtained during SPDC: ET opening pressure (ETOP), ET opening duration (ETOD) and ET opening frequency (ETOF), hypobaric (Phase 1) and hyperbaric (Phase 2) data were compared.
RESULTS: Mean value for Valsalva maneuver ETOP was 40.10 ± 19.02 mbar in Phase 2 vs. 42.82 ± 21.75 mbar in Phase 1. For ETOD it was 2.80 ± 2.09 seconds in Phase 2 vs. 2.51 ± 1.90 seconds in Phase 1. For swallowing, mean value for ETOP was 33.47 ± 14.50 mbar in Phase 2 vs. 28.44 ± 14.04 in Phase 1. ETOD was 0.82 ± 0.60 seconds in Phase 2 vs. 0.76 ± 0.55 seconds in Phase 1. There was no statistical significance for ETOP, ETOD and ETOF between the two phases.
CONCLUSION: No statistical significant difference was evident for active pressure equalization (Valsalva and swallowing) between a hyperbaric setting (dive) and a hypobaric setting (flight) in healthy subjects.