鼻瓣膜手术对打鼾的影响

文献信息

中文摘要

目的： 打鼾是耳鼻喉科和睡眠医学门诊的常见主诉，具有重要的社会意义，并可能提示更严重的疾病，如上气道阻力综合征和阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停。这项前瞻性分析研究评估了鼻部手术对减少有鼻塞病史患者打鼾持续时间的影响。
方法： 选取30例患者并分为两组：第1组由存在复杂鼻中隔偏曲、鼻瓣膜薄弱、可见鼻结构改变及打鼾病史的患者组成；第2组为中度至重度鼻中隔偏曲并伴有打鼾主诉的患者。使用SnoreLab™移动应用程序测量打鼾持续时间占睡眠时间的百分比。此外，使用特定量表评估鼻阻塞症状、阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停风险、日间过度嗜睡及鼻部美学满意度。
结果： 结果显示第1组打鼾时间显著减少。两组中均发现慢性鼻阻塞与阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停风险增加之间存在弱关联。
结论： 我们得出结论，手术矫正鼻阻塞可能是减少打鼾的有效方法，强调了对有鼻阻塞和打鼾主诉的患者进行鼻部解剖全面评估的重要性。
证据等级： 这项题为“鼻瓣膜手术对打鼾的影响”的研究被归类为III级证据。该级别基于其作为非随机前瞻性分析研究的设计。像这样随时间追踪患者以评估结局而不使用随机对照组的观察性前瞻性研究，根据临床研究中普遍接受的证据等级，通常被归类为III级证据。

英文摘要

OBJECTIVES: Snoring is a common complaint in ENT and sleep medicine clinics, with significant social relevance and potentially indicating more serious conditions, such as upper airway resistance syndrome and obstructive sleep apnea. This prospective analytical study evaluated the impact of nasal surgery on reducing snoring duration in patients with a history of nasal obstruction.
METHODS: Thirty patients were selected and divided into two groups: Group 1, consisting of patients with complex septal deviations, nasal valve weaknesses, visible nasal structural changes, and a history of snoring; and Group 2, with moderate to severe septal deviations and snoring complaints. The duration of snoring as a percentage of sleep time was measured using the SnoreLab™ mobile app. Additionally, nasal obstructive symptoms, risk of obstructive sleep apnea, excessive daytime sleepiness, and nasal aesthetic satisfaction were assessed using specific scales.
RESULTS: The results showed a significant reduction in snoring time in Group 1. A weak association was found between chronic nasal obstruction and increased risk of obstructive sleep apnea in both groups.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that surgical correction of nasal obstructions may be an effective approach to reducing snoring, emphasizing the importance of a thorough assessment of nasal anatomy in patients with complaints of nasal obstruction and snoring.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: The study, titled "The Impact of Nasal Valve Surgery on Snoring", is classified as Level III evidence. This level is based on the study's design as a prospective analytical study without randomization. Observational prospective studies like this one, which track patients over time to evaluate outcomes without the use of randomized control groups, are typically categorized as Level III evidence according to commonly accepted evidence hierarchies in clinical research.