The Journal of otolaryngology · 2006
Effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment on transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in patients with urinary lithiasis.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Muluk Nuray Bayar, Yilmaz Erdal, Dinçer Can
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of electrohydraulic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) on the transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) of the patients on whom ESWL was applied for urinary stones.
METHODS: The study group consisted of 10 patients (7 male, 3 female) with unilateral urinary lithiasis on whom ESWL was applied in one course and 20 of their ears. The control group was chosen from patients who attended the Otolaryngology and Urology departments. Ten patients (7 male, 3 female) without urinary stones and ear problems and 20 of their ears constituted the control group. Only patients with normal hearing levels were included in the study. TEOAEs were recorded before the ESWL application (B-ESWL), on the first day (A-ESWL-1), and on day 15 (A-ESWL-15).
RESULTS: At B-ESWL, the mean stimulus for the control group was significantly higher than that of the study group. Three kilohertz percentage values were significantly decreased on A-ESWL-1. The difference between A-ESWL-1 and A-ESWL-15 and between B-ESWL and A-ESWL-15 of the study group at 3.0 kHz% was not significant.
CONCLUSION: It was thought that the reason for only temporary damage at 3.0 kHz was a result of the resonance effect of the external auditory canal. It was concluded that no damage on the other frequencies was due to protective earheadings and short exposure time to the noise. Since all of our patients had protective earheadings on both ears during the ESWL procedure, they may have been protected from any permanent damage of the inner ear and hairy cells of the cochlea.
METHODS: The study group consisted of 10 patients (7 male, 3 female) with unilateral urinary lithiasis on whom ESWL was applied in one course and 20 of their ears. The control group was chosen from patients who attended the Otolaryngology and Urology departments. Ten patients (7 male, 3 female) without urinary stones and ear problems and 20 of their ears constituted the control group. Only patients with normal hearing levels were included in the study. TEOAEs were recorded before the ESWL application (B-ESWL), on the first day (A-ESWL-1), and on day 15 (A-ESWL-15).
RESULTS: At B-ESWL, the mean stimulus for the control group was significantly higher than that of the study group. Three kilohertz percentage values were significantly decreased on A-ESWL-1. The difference between A-ESWL-1 and A-ESWL-15 and between B-ESWL and A-ESWL-15 of the study group at 3.0 kHz% was not significant.
CONCLUSION: It was thought that the reason for only temporary damage at 3.0 kHz was a result of the resonance effect of the external auditory canal. It was concluded that no damage on the other frequencies was due to protective earheadings and short exposure time to the noise. Since all of our patients had protective earheadings on both ears during the ESWL procedure, they may have been protected from any permanent damage of the inner ear and hairy cells of the cochlea.