Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Clin Oral Investig ; 22(5): 1953-1958, 2018 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29192349

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to determine whether placement of an antibiotic oral pack on the hard palate reduces fistula rates after primary cleft palatoplasty. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study was a parallel blocked randomized controlled trial. The study consisted of two groups of 100 patients each with non-syndromic unilateral complete cleft lip, alveolus, and hard and soft palate that underwent primary palatoplasty. Group A had an oral pack placed on the hard palate for 5 days postoperatively while group B did not. Occurrence of fistulae between both groups was tested using odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: In 2% of the patients in group A, a fistula was found 6 months after palatal surgery. In contrast, in 21% of the patients in group B, a palatal fistula could be confirmed. The fistula occurrence in group A was statistically significantly lower than that in group B (OR = 0.0768, CI = [0.02 … 0.34], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study provide evidence that the rate of fistula formation after primary palatoplasty is significantly reduced if a pack soaked with antibiotic cream is placed on the palate postoperatively for 5 days. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of an antibiotic pack after cleft palate repair can be recommended to prevent occurrence of oronasal fistulae.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/administração & dosagem , Fissura Palatina/cirurgia , Fístula Bucal/prevenção & controle , Palato Duro/cirurgia , Administração Tópica , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 142(1): 42e-50e, 2018 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29652768

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Is one-stage or two-stage palatoplasty more effective for preventing fistula formation and hypernasality in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate? METHODS: This parallel blocked randomized controlled trial included 100 patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate with a repaired cleft lip, divided into two equal groups. Group A had one-stage palatoplasty patients at age 12 to 13 months while group B had two-stage palatoplasty patients with soft palatoplasty at age 12 to 13 months and hard palatoplasty at age 24 to 25 months. Presence of a fistula was tested clinically at 3 years and speech was tested using nasometry and perceptual analyses at 6 years. Group C consisted of noncleft controls (n = 20, age 6 years) for speech using nasometry. Fistula rates, hypernasality ratings, and nasalance scores were compared between groups A and B. Nasometry recordings of groups A and B were compared with control group C. RESULTS: There was no difference in fistula rates between groups A and B (p = 0.409; 95 percent CI, 0.365 to 11.9). Mean nasalance scores of group A showed higher nasalance than group B (p = 0.006; 95 percent CI, 1.16 to 6.53). Perceptual analysis showed no difference between groups A and B (p = 0.837 and p = 1.000). Group A showed higher mean nasalance than group C (p = 0.837 and p = 1.000), whereas group B showed no difference (p = 0.088; 95 percent CI, -0.14 to 2.02). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in fistula rates between groups. Nasalance was slightly higher in patients in the one-stage palatoplasty group than two-stage palatoplasty group, but the difference was not clinically significant. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.


Assuntos
Fenda Labial/cirurgia , Fissura Palatina/cirurgia , Fístula do Sistema Digestório/prevenção & controle , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ortognáticos/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Fístula do Sistema Respiratório/prevenção & controle , Insuficiência Velofaríngea/prevenção & controle , Assistência ao Convalescente , Fístula do Sistema Digestório/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Doenças da Boca/etiologia , Doenças da Boca/prevenção & controle , Doenças Nasais/etiologia , Doenças Nasais/prevenção & controle , Palato Duro/cirurgia , Palato Mole/cirurgia , Fístula do Sistema Respiratório/etiologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Insuficiência Velofaríngea/etiologia
3.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 154(1 Suppl): S1-S41, 2016 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26832942

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This update of a 2004 guideline codeveloped by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Family Physicians, provides evidence-based recommendations to manage otitis media with effusion (OME), defined as the presence of fluid in the middle ear without signs or symptoms of acute ear infection. Changes from the prior guideline include consumer advocates added to the update group, evidence from 4 new clinical practice guidelines, 20 new systematic reviews, and 49 randomized control trials, enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making, a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships, and new and expanded recommendations for the diagnosis and management of OME. PURPOSE: The purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in managing OME and to create explicit and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specifically, the goals are to improve diagnostic accuracy, identify children who are most susceptible to developmental sequelae from OME, and educate clinicians and patients regarding the favorable natural history of most OME and the clinical benefits for medical therapy (eg, steroids, antihistamines, decongestants). Additional goals relate to OME surveillance, hearing and language evaluation, and management of OME detected by newborn screening. The target patient for the guideline is a child aged 2 months through 12 years with OME, with or without developmental disabilities or underlying conditions that predispose to OME and its sequelae. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage children with OME, and it applies to any setting in which OME would be identified, monitored, or managed. This guideline, however, does not apply to patients <2 months or >12 years old. ACTION STATEMENTS: The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians (1) should document the presence of middle ear effusion with pneumatic otoscopy when diagnosing OME in a child; (2) should perform pneumatic otoscopy to assess for OME in a child with otalgia, hearing loss, or both; (3) should obtain tympanometry in children with suspected OME for whom the diagnosis is uncertain after performing (or attempting) pneumatic otoscopy; (4) should manage the child with OME who is not at risk with watchful waiting for 3 months from the date of effusion onset (if known) or 3 months from the date of diagnosis (if onset is unknown); (5) should recommend against using intranasal or systemic steroids for treating OME; (6) should recommend against using systemic antibiotics for treating OME; and (7) should recommend against using antihistamines, decongestants, or both for treating OME.The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should document in the medical record counseling of parents of infants with OME who fail a newborn screening regarding the importance of follow-up to ensure that hearing is normal when OME resolves and to exclude an underlying sensorineural hearing loss; (2) should determine if a child with OME is at increased risk for speech, language, or learning problems from middle ear effusion because of baseline sensory, physical, cognitive, or behavioral factors; (3) should evaluate at-risk children for OME at the time of diagnosis of an at-risk condition and at 12 to 18 months of age (if diagnosed as being at risk prior to this time); (4) should not routinely screen children for OME who are not at risk and do not have symptoms that may be attributable to OME, such as hearing difficulties, balance (vestibular) problems, poor school performance, behavioral problems, or ear discomfort; (5) should educate children with OME and their families regarding the natural history of OME, need for follow-up, and the possible sequelae; (6) should obtain an age-appropriate hearing test if OME persists for 3 months or longer OR for OME of any duration in an at-risk child; (7) should counsel families of children with bilateral OME and documented hearing loss about the potential impact on speech and language development; (8) should reevaluate, at 3- to 6-month intervals, children with chronic OME until the effusion is no longer present, significant hearing loss is identified, or structural abnormalities of the eardrum or middle ear are suspected; (9) should recommend tympanostomy tubes when surgery is performed for OME in a child <4 years old; adenoidectomy should not be performed unless a distinct indication exists (nasal obstruction, chronic adenoiditis); (10) should recommend tympanostomy tubes, adenoidectomy, or both when surgery is performed for OME in a child ≥4 years old; and (11) should document resolution of OME, improved hearing, or improved quality of life when managing a child with OME.


Assuntos
Otite Média com Derrame/diagnóstico , Otite Média com Derrame/tratamento farmacológico , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA