论文部分内容阅读
作者采用３种不同的颞颌关节镜术式──术式Ⅰ：粘连松解＋灌洗术，术式Ⅱ：术式Ⅰ＋盘复位操作＋硬化疗法，术式Ⅲ：术式Ⅱ＋关节盘缝合牵引固定，对６５例盘移位患者的７６侧颞颌关节进行手术治疗，其中术式Ⅰ：１４侧，术式Ⅱ：３１侧，术式Ⅲ：３１侧。术后随访６—８４月，并根据临床检查、Ｘ线复查及信访问卷等判别疗效。结果：总有效率为７３．７％；不同术式的有效率为：术式Ⅰ５０％，术式Ⅱ８４．９％，术式Ⅲ７４．２％。术式Ⅰ、Ⅱ间疗效有显著差异，术式Ⅰ、Ⅲ之间及Ⅱ、Ⅲ之间无显著差异；对可复性盘移位，术式Ⅱ、Ⅲ疗效明显优于术式Ⅰ，而术式Ⅱ、Ⅲ之间无统计学意义；对不可复性盘移位，术式Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ之间无显著差异。此外，作者还就手术的成败原因、重复关节镜的可行性、随访期、关节镜手术与开放性手术的关系进行了探讨。
The authors used three different temporomandibular joint arthroplasty ─ ─ surgical method Ⅰ: adhesiolysis + lavage surgery Ⅱ: surgical operation + sclerotherapy + sclerotherapy, surgery Ⅲ: surgical Ⅱ + joint suture Traction and fixation were performed in 76 patients with temporomandibular joint of 65 patients with disc displacement. Among them, operation Ⅰ: 14, operation Ⅱ: 31, operation Ⅲ: 31. The patients were followed up for 6-8 months, and the curative effect was judged according to the clinical examination, X-ray examination and letters and visits questionnaire. Results: The total effective rate was 73.7%. The effective rates of different surgical procedures were as follows: surgical procedure Ⅰ50%, surgical procedure Ⅱ84.9%, surgical procedure Ⅲ74.2%. There was significant difference between the two groups in the therapeutic effect of type Ⅰ and type Ⅱ, there was no significant difference between type Ⅰ and type Ⅲ and between type Ⅱ and type Ⅲ. The effect of type Ⅱ and type Ⅲ was better than type Ⅰ There was no significant difference between the two operative methods Ⅱ and Ⅲ. There was no significant difference between the two operative methods Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ. In addition, the author also discussed the reason of the success or failure of surgery, the feasibility of repeated arthroscopy, the follow-up period, the relationship between arthroscopic surgery and open surgery.