| 贾岩峰,王营,牟玉霞,等.甘南地区 115例颌面及颈部间隙感染病人的临床分析[J].安徽医药,2026,30(6):1204-1208. |
| 甘南地区 115例颌面及颈部间隙感染病人的临床分析 |
| Clinical analysis on 115 cases of maxillofacial and neck space infection in Gannan region |
| |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1009-6469.2026.06.028 |
| 中文关键词: 颈部筋膜间隙感染 下颌疾病 颌面及颈部间隙 感染 脓肿 穿刺 引流 |
| 英文关键词: Cervical interfascial space infection Mandibular diseases Maxillofacial and cervical spaces Infected Abscess Puncture Drainage |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 47 |
| 全文下载次数: 20 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的总结颌面及颈部间隙感染的诊断治疗经验。方法回顾性收集甘南藏族自治州人民医院 2022年 10月至 2024年 10月收治的 115例颌面及颈部间隙感染病人资料，对发病原因、临床特点、诊断及治疗过程进行分析，总结治疗经验。结果 115例颌面及颈部间隙感染病人的年龄集中在 15~60岁，以青中年为主。病因以牙源性感染和咽源性感染为主，分别占 61.7%和 20.0%。按治疗方式不同分为抗感染组、抗感染 +穿刺组、抗感染 +拔牙组、抗感染 +切开引流组，分别为 56例(48.7%)、 20例( 17.4%)、 27例( 23.5%)和 12例( 10.4%)其病因分析差异有统计学意义( P=0.001)。颌面及颈部间隙感染病人主要为单间隙感染占 85.2%，双间隙感染占 10.4%，多间隙，感染者占 4.4%。其中单间隙感染者以下颌间隙为主，其次为咽旁间隙；多间隙感染者均包括颌下间隙及咽旁间隙；各组病人在感染间隙分布上差异有统计学意义( P=0.025)。四组病人中，住院时间分别为 6(4，9)d、6(5，7)d、6(5，7)d、16(7，16)d，差异有统计学意义( P=0.004)，抗感染 +切开引流组病人住院时间较长。所有病人治疗及时，未出现气道梗阻，最终都没有行气管切开术，均治愈出院，无严重并发症出现。结论颌面及颈部感染病人应及时就诊，静脉予以强有力的抗生素，覆盖需氧菌和厌氧菌，以控制感染；对于脓肿形成病人，视情况通过穿刺、口内或颈部切开引流及时排脓减压，以防感染进一步扩散；严密观察病人的生命体征，做好气道护理，以免出现危及生命的并发症。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To summarize the diagnosis and treatment experience of maxillofacial and cervical space infections.Methods The data of 115 patients with maxillofacial and cervical space infections admitted to Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture People'sHospital was collected from October 2022 to October 2024, the causes, clinical characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment process wereanalyzed, and the treatment experience was summarized.Results The ages of 115 patients with maxillofacial and cervical space infec. tions concentrated between 15-60 years old, mainly young and middle-aged people. The main causes were dental infection and pharyn.geal infection, accounting for 61.7% and 20.0%, respectively. According to different treatment methods, they were divided into fourgroups: simple anti-infection group, anti-infection combined puncture group, anti-infection combined tooth extraction group, and anti-infection combined incision and drainage group, with 56 cases (48.7%), 20 cases (17.4%), 27 cases (23.5%), and 12 cases (10.4%), re.spectively; The etiology analysis showed statistical differences, with P=0.001. Patients with maxillofacial and cervical space infectionswere mainly single space infections, accounting for 85.2%, double space infections, accounting for 10.4%, and multiple space infec.tions, accounting for 4.4%. Among them, single space infections were mainly in the mandibular space, followed by the pharyngealspace; Multiple gap infections include submandibular and parapharyngeal space. There was statistically significant difference in differ.ent infection intervals, with P=0.025. The median length of hospital stay among the four groups of patients was 6 (4,9) d, 6 (5,7) d, 6 (5, 7) d, 16 (7,16) d, with P=0.004, The difference was statistically significant, with patients in the anti-infection combined incision and drainage group having longer hospital stays. All patients were timely treated, without airway obstruction, and ultimately did not undergotracheotomy. They were all cured and discharged without serious complications. Conclusions Patients with maxillofacial and neck space infections should timely seek medical attention and receive strong intravenous antibiotics to cover both aerobic and anaerobicbacteria, in order to control the infection. For patients with abscess formation, timely drainage and decompression can be achievedthrough puncture, intraoral or cervical incision depending on the situation to prevent further spread of infection. The patient's vital signs should be closely monitored, and airway care should be properly managed to prevent life-threatening complications. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
