The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2008
Cortical mastoidectomy in quiescent, tubotympanic, chronic otitis media: is it routinely necessary?
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bhat K V, Naseeruddin K, Nagalotimath U S, Kumar P R, Hegde J S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare outcomes for mastoidotympanoplasty and for tympanoplasty alone in cases of quiescent, tubotympanic, chronic, suppurative otitis media.
STUDY DESIGN: Single-blinded, randomised, controlled study within a tertiary referral hospital.
METHODS: Sixty-eight cases were randomly allocated into two groups. In group one, 35 ears underwent type one tympanoplasty along with cortical mastoidectomy. In group two, 33 ears underwent type one tympanoplasty alone. Outcome measures were as follows: perforation closure and graft uptake, hearing improvement, disease eradication, and post-operative complications.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in hearing improvement, tympanic perforation closure, graft uptake or disease eradication, comparing the two groups at three and six months post-operatively.
CONCLUSION: Mastoidotympanoplasty was not found to be superior to tympanoplasty alone over a short term follow-up period. Hence, it may not be necessary to undertake routine mastoid exploration at this stage of disease.
STUDY DESIGN: Single-blinded, randomised, controlled study within a tertiary referral hospital.
METHODS: Sixty-eight cases were randomly allocated into two groups. In group one, 35 ears underwent type one tympanoplasty along with cortical mastoidectomy. In group two, 33 ears underwent type one tympanoplasty alone. Outcome measures were as follows: perforation closure and graft uptake, hearing improvement, disease eradication, and post-operative complications.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in hearing improvement, tympanic perforation closure, graft uptake or disease eradication, comparing the two groups at three and six months post-operatively.
CONCLUSION: Mastoidotympanoplasty was not found to be superior to tympanoplasty alone over a short term follow-up period. Hence, it may not be necessary to undertake routine mastoid exploration at this stage of disease.