Journal
Article title
Content
Full texts:
Title variants
Languages of publication
Abstracts
Introduction: Stapedotomy is currently the surgical technique of choice for treating otosclerosis. Despite this, there is no agreement about the best technique to perform a small fenestra footplate, therefore multiple procedures have been proposed. The aim of this study was to investigate the hearing outcomes of microdrill and manual perforator.
Material and Methods: An observational prospective study was carried out on patients who underwent stapedotomy. We analyzed the hearing threshold in two groups of patients according to the way the fenestra footplate was realized by microdrill or manual perforator.
Results: A total of 113 patients were evaluated. Postoperative hearing gain of the microdrill group was 23.29 (18.58) dB HL 95% CI (18.40–28.18), while in the manual perforator group, it was 22.67 (12.91) dB HL 95% CI (19.07–26.26). Both groups were statistically significant. Postoperative bone conductive hearing threshold at the frequencies of 0.5, 1 and 2 KHz and postoperative air conductive hearing threshold at the frequencies of 2 and 4 KHz showed statistically significant differences in the manual perforator group. The closure of air-bone gap was higher in the microdrill group with statistically significant differences.
Conclusion: Both manual perforator and microdrill have good hearing outcomes at six months after surgery. The manual perforator has better audiological outcomes than microdrill. Hence, the manual perforator is a safe technique and can be used in centers that do not have other methods to make the small fenestra.
Material and Methods: An observational prospective study was carried out on patients who underwent stapedotomy. We analyzed the hearing threshold in two groups of patients according to the way the fenestra footplate was realized by microdrill or manual perforator.
Results: A total of 113 patients were evaluated. Postoperative hearing gain of the microdrill group was 23.29 (18.58) dB HL 95% CI (18.40–28.18), while in the manual perforator group, it was 22.67 (12.91) dB HL 95% CI (19.07–26.26). Both groups were statistically significant. Postoperative bone conductive hearing threshold at the frequencies of 0.5, 1 and 2 KHz and postoperative air conductive hearing threshold at the frequencies of 2 and 4 KHz showed statistically significant differences in the manual perforator group. The closure of air-bone gap was higher in the microdrill group with statistically significant differences.
Conclusion: Both manual perforator and microdrill have good hearing outcomes at six months after surgery. The manual perforator has better audiological outcomes than microdrill. Hence, the manual perforator is a safe technique and can be used in centers that do not have other methods to make the small fenestra.
Journal
Year
Volume
Pages
45-50
Physical description
Dates
published
2020-05-13
Contributors
author
author
author
author
References
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.ceon.element-1c2edfbc-53aa-3049-859e-997f50fee2e6
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.