Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ; 280(7): 3453-3459, 2023 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37062783

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Pyrotechnics are a long-standing tradition at the turn of the year. There are little data available on New Year's Eve-associated ORL injuries. Due to restrictions during the Corona pandemic, the handling of fireworks and meetings on New Year's Eve 2020-2022 had been significantly changed. Our aim was to analyze first data about New Year's Eve-associated ORL injuries. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 16 turns of the year (2006-2022) at a University ORL department was performed. The 2 recent years were influenced by the changes and restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Of 343 emergency presentations, 69 presented with New Year's Eve-associated reasons (20%). 72% were male, 15.9% were underage. 74% presented for fireworks-related injuries, 19% due to violent altercations. Noise trauma was present in 71%. The average number of New Year's Eve-associated emergency patients per year and the average total number of patients were reduced by more than half under COVID-19 pandemic conditions. CONCLUSIONS: New Year's Eve-associated ORL injuries range from inner ear trauma to midface fractures. Long-term damage may include hearing loss and tinnitus. These results shall support the responsible use of fireworks even after the end of the special regulations of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Fraturas Ósseas , Otolaringologia , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiologia
2.
Laryngorhinootologie ; 102(1): 16-26, 2023 01.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36395786

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: In case of cochlear implantation seroma, hematoma, local wound infections or vertigo are rare but typical complications. In contrast, emphysema is seldom reported. They can occur after cochlear implantation both in the postoperative healing phase and years later. A therapeutic algorithm does not yet exist. METHODS: We report on 3 patients with subcutaneous emphysema in the area of the receiver-stimulator. An unsystematic review of the literature of cases with emphysema after cochlear implantation highlights possible risk factors and the therapeutic options. RESULTS: The 3 cases developed subcutaneous emphysema 2-11 month after cochlear implantation due to nose blowing or CPAP therapy in obstructive sleep apnea. The current literature reports another 35 cases of emphysema after cochlear implantation. Air insufflation via the Eustachian tube is the most frequently described cause. Diseases of the nose and sinuses, tube dysfunction and obstructive sleep apnea are potential risk factors. Pressure bandage, puncture, tympanic tubes, and surgical revision are common treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Most emphysema can be controlled by conservative methods such as pressure bandaging and behavioral instruction. Punctures should be avoided due to the risk of upcoming infections. The prophylactic use of antibiotics seems dispensable. Surgical revision should be considered especially in cases of pneumocephalus with suspected leakage in the dura. The coverage of the mastoidectomy by a bony cap can be precautious and beneficial in cases with risk factors.


Assuntos
Implante Coclear , Implantes Cocleares , Enfisema Subcutâneo , Humanos , Implante Coclear/efeitos adversos , Implante Coclear/métodos , Enfisema Subcutâneo/etiologia , Enfisema Subcutâneo/terapia , Implantes Cocleares/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Reoperação , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/terapia , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA