Accéder directement au contenu Accéder directement à la navigation
Article dans une revue

Extended endonasal approach versus maxillary swing approach to the parapharyngeal space

Abstract : Background * The nasopharyngeal and parapharyngeal spaces are difficult for surgeons to access. Of the various external routes described, the maxillary swing has emerged as the gold standard because of its simplicity. However, its morbidity has led to the development of less invasive techniques. The purpose of our study was to compare the surgical anatomy of the maxillary swing with that of the endoscopic endonasal approach. * Methods * Each procedure was performed on 10 anatomic specimens. The exposure and the limits obtained were evaluated. A CT scan analysis was performed. * Results * The endoscopic endonasal approach extended the limits, offering wider exposure. The endoscopic endonasal approach made possible better visualization of deep structures and precise dissection of the parapharyngeal spaces. However, the maxillary swing provided better access to the oropharynx and could be completed 3 times faster. * Conclusion * The endoscopic endonasal approach provides excellent exposure, a wide dissection range, and precise definition of anatomic structures, making it an alternative of choice rather than the maxillary swing approach.
Liste complète des métadonnées

https://hal-normandie-univ.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02190507
Contributeur : Eve Sorel <>
Soumis le : lundi 22 juillet 2019 - 15:08:07
Dernière modification le : jeudi 13 février 2020 - 15:10:09

Identifiants

Citation

Vivien Roger, Vincent Patron, Sylvain Moreau, Jeeve Kanagalingam, Emmanuel Babin, et al.. Extended endonasal approach versus maxillary swing approach to the parapharyngeal space. Archives of Otorhinolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, JAMA Network- American Medical Association, 2018, 40 (6), pp.1120-1130. ⟨10.1002/hed.25092⟩. ⟨hal-02190507⟩

Partager

Métriques

Consultations de la notice

81