Experience in the surgical treatment of juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma at the Hospital de Especialidades No. 2 "Lic. Luis Donaldo Colosio Murrieta", Mexican Social Security Institute, Ciudad Obregón, Sonora
Objective: To present our experience and assess the recurrence of juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma after a surgical treatment (open versus endoscopic approach) in the country’s northwestern Department of Otorhinolaryngology. Materials and methods: An observational, retrospective, analytical stud...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2018 |
| País: | Perú |
| Institución: | Universidad de San Martín de Porres |
| Repositorio: | Horizonte médico |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:horizontemedico.usmp.edu.pe:article/778 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://horizontemedico.usmp.edu.pe/index.php/horizontemed/article/view/778 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Angiofibroma Neoplasias nasofaríngeas Recurrencia Embolización Nasopharyngeal neoplasms Recurrence Embolization |
| Sumario: | Objective: To present our experience and assess the recurrence of juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma after a surgical treatment (open versus endoscopic approach) in the country’s northwestern Department of Otorhinolaryngology. Materials and methods: An observational, retrospective, analytical study. The medical records of patients diagnosed with juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma, who were treated at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery of this institution from 2014 to 2017, were reviewed. Results: A total of 19 patients diagnosed with juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma underwent a surgical procedure, out of which 14 had an open surgery and 5 an endoscopic one. Recurrence accounted for 50 % and 40 %, respectively, which was not statistically significant (p = 0.88). However, other variables were compared, such as the need for admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), which was represented by 71 % in the case of the open approach and 20 % for the endoscopic approach, where a significant difference was found (p = 0.04). Conclusions: The study shows no statistically significant advantage of the endoscopic approach versus the open approach, but demonstrates less need for ICU admissions, which would reduce healthcare costs. |
|---|