1997
DOI: 10.3109/00016489709124122
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Laser-uvulopalatopharyngoplasty on the Nasal and Nasopharyngeal Volume Measured with Acoustic Rhinometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
4

Year Published

2001
2001
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
12
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In an evaluation of uvulopalatopharyngoplasty using acoustic rhinometry the authors concluded that no effect was seen in the epipharynx but was observed in the turbinate region. This may be due to sound transmission from one side through the epipharynx to the other side (357). No correlation between the sleep apnoea index and nasal dimensions could be found in a study of 76 patients with sleep apnoea syndrome but without any nasal complaints (358).…”
Section: Other Clinical Uses Of Acoustic Rhinometry and Acoustic Reflmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In an evaluation of uvulopalatopharyngoplasty using acoustic rhinometry the authors concluded that no effect was seen in the epipharynx but was observed in the turbinate region. This may be due to sound transmission from one side through the epipharynx to the other side (357). No correlation between the sleep apnoea index and nasal dimensions could be found in a study of 76 patients with sleep apnoea syndrome but without any nasal complaints (358).…”
Section: Other Clinical Uses Of Acoustic Rhinometry and Acoustic Reflmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This comparison is somewhat limited due to the fact that many authors who assessed nasal volumes in subjects with no evidence of nasal obstruction [1][2][3][4]6,[9][10][11][12]14,15 studied different segments from those used by Antila et al, 6 on which our study is based, or else reported bilateral measurements. 13 On the other hand, Antila et al 6 analyzed patients with evidence of nasopharyngeal obstruction, complaints of snoring and sleep apnea, which also compromises a comparison. Nevertheless, Antila et al6 obtained similar average results for V 1 (2.03±0.48 for the right side, and 2.04±0.53 for the left side) and V 2 (3.49±1.20 for the right side, and 3.40±1.05 for the left side), corroborating our findings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…3 The technique is used to check nasal geometry, to identify altered patency, and to monitor the results of surgical procedures on nasal and nasopharyngeal airways. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Hilberg e Pedersen 8 underlined the importance of creating cross-sectional and volume reference values in their recommendations to the European Rhinological Society on the use of acoustic rhinometry to analyze naso-respiratory function. Nasal volume values based on acoustic rhinometry in normal subjects have been published by various authors using different equipment to analyze nasal segments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quanto aos volumes dos segmentos correspondentes à região da válvula nasal (V1) e das conchas nasais (V2), no estudo de Gomes (2004) essas variáveis corresponderam, em média, a 1,68±0,32 e 3,98±1,21 cm 3 , respectivamente. Neste caso, a comparação com outros estudos não foi possível, pois os autores que realizaram esse tipo de medida em normais (Grymer et al 1989, Kesavanathan et al 1995, Morgan et al 1995, Roithmannet al 1995, Tomkinson e Eccles 1998, Corey et al 1998, Kunkel et al 1999, Silkoff et al 1999, Sung et al 2000 o fizeram em segmentos diversos dos propostos por Antila et al (1997), nos quais nos baseamos, ou então, reportaram medidas bilaterais, como Kunkel et al (1999), impedindo a comparação. Antila et al (1997), em particular, não analisaram indivíduos normais, mas, sim, pacientes com evidências de obstrução nasofaríngea, queixa de ronco e apnéia no sono, de modo que a comparação, também neste caso, ficou prejudicada.…”
Section: Ast1unclassified