A Clinical Study On The Treatment Of Chronic Tonsillitis With Tonsil-pecking Method

ObjecttiveBy chronic clinical view to verify that tonsil-pecking could treat tonsillitis and it is safe, While trying to uphold the Cauterization in contrast to know the advantagesthe of the two Extemal Treatments, and to provide clinical use of reference to the doctor.MethodsChoose the present study cases from guangzhou university of chinese medicine first hospitals ENT clinic diagnosed as chronic tonsillitis and the number is 90, Of which 14-60 patients respectively give tonsil-pecking and Cauterization treatment according to different doctors and patients will., five times a course of treatment, that acquired thirty-one and thirty at the end of time.4-13 in the cases resulting from the national science and technology supporting plan of the eleventh five-years which is tonsil-pecking treat chronic tonsillitis standardized operation and technology research., and having a total of 29, which together at the effect of statistics, not to do more. Since time is limited and the patient needs to come here for many times, the patients can only complete a course of treatment, failing to follow them. So only with a course of integration and analysis.RusultsPecking for example, a group of 60, Significant curative effect 10 cases, effective 35 cases and Invalid 15, efficient 75%.4 to 13 years of age of 29 cases, patients of tonsil-pecking for group 1, that is Significant curative effect 3 cases, effective 16 cases and Invalid 10, efficient 65.51%.14 to 60 years of age of 31 cases, patients of tonsil-pecking for group 2, that is Significant curative effect 7 cases, effective 19 cases and Invalid 5, efficient 83.87%. Cauterization for example, a group of 30, Significant curative effect 4 cases, effective 22 cases and Invalid 4, efficient86.67%.Upholding the Cauterizationin group contrast with tonsil-pecking group 2, there is notable difference between the two in the efficient (P> 0.05). Making comparisons on the secretion of the Tonsils, Tonsils red, Sore sick, foreign body sensation in pharynx, between the two groups before treating integration, P> 0.05, that means there is no marked difference. For the differentials of points between before and after treatment by contrast, On the secretion of the Tonsils, two groups are remarkable differences (P= 0.005 < 0.05), so the Cauterizationin group is better than tonsil-pecking group 2. On the Tonsils red and Sore sick,, two groups are also remarkable differences (P< 0.05), but tonsil-pecking group 2. is better than the Cauterizationin group. On the foreign body sensation in pharynx, there is notable difference between the two groups (P=0.234> 0.05). On the size of the tonsils, the Cauterizationin group 80% of that is smaller than before, is remarkable better than tonsil-pecking group which is 8.3%.ConclusionsBoth of the tonsil-pecking and the Cauterizationin have effective for chronic tonsillitis, and no difference between them. But on the secretion and the size of the Tonsils, the Cauterizationin is better than tonsil-pecking. On the Tonsils red and Sore sick,, the tonsil-pecking is better than the Cauterizationin. On the foreign body sensation in pharynx, there is notable difference between the them. Since time is limited,we can not observate the long-termfollow-upresult of two Extemal Treatments. So there's no way to tell us whether they could make the relapse decrease and good health. So the next we should do is the follow-up of these sick patients, and ress for furthet scientific research.