Singapore medical journal · 2023
Managing cholesteatomas with labyrinthine fistula.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Aw Natalie Min Yi, Thong Jiun Fong, Tan Barrie Yau Boon, Tan Vanessa Yee Jueen
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: A retrospective study (2011 to 2018) was conducted to evaluate the management of cholesteatomas with labyrinthine fistulae (LFs), clinical characteristics and postoperative hearing outcomes in a hospital.
METHODS: Demographic data of patients with primary middle ear mastoidectomies for cholesteatoma were extracted. Preoperative high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) temporal bone and intraoperative findings, and hearing levels preoperatively and postoperatively were evaluated.
RESULTS: Of the middle ear cholesteatomas, 15.6% ( n = 14) of ears were complicated by LF. HRCT scans showed 92.9% sensitivity and 94.7% specificity in the identification of LFs. Intraoperative findings of LFs include stapes erosion (78.6%), malleus erosion (78.6%), incus erosion (92.9%), dehiscence of tegmen tympani (28.6%) and tympanic facial canal (64.3%). Compared to the non-LF group, the LF group showed significantly higher incidence of stapes erosion ( P < 0.001), tegmen tympani dehiscence ( P = 0.016) and semicircular canal dehiscence ( P < 0.001). Matrix was removed completely in 85.7% ( n = 12) and was left behind in 14.3% ( n = 2) of ears. Also, 21.5% ( n = 3) had preoperative dead ears. Postoperative hearing results had a mean follow-up time of 2.1 (standard deviation 1.5, range 0.14-4.84) years. In the matrix removal group ( n = 9), 77.9% had unchanged hearing levels, 11.1% showed improvement and 11.1% showed decrease in hearing levels. The matrix preservation group ( n = 2) had deteriorated hearing levels.
CONCLUSION: Preservation of hearing in LFs is possible with cautious matrix removal. Despite matrix preservation to preserve hearing in large LFs, our patients' hearing deteriorated postoperatively. Longer follow-up of hearing with matrix preservation may show poorer hearing outcomes.
METHODS: Demographic data of patients with primary middle ear mastoidectomies for cholesteatoma were extracted. Preoperative high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) temporal bone and intraoperative findings, and hearing levels preoperatively and postoperatively were evaluated.
RESULTS: Of the middle ear cholesteatomas, 15.6% ( n = 14) of ears were complicated by LF. HRCT scans showed 92.9% sensitivity and 94.7% specificity in the identification of LFs. Intraoperative findings of LFs include stapes erosion (78.6%), malleus erosion (78.6%), incus erosion (92.9%), dehiscence of tegmen tympani (28.6%) and tympanic facial canal (64.3%). Compared to the non-LF group, the LF group showed significantly higher incidence of stapes erosion ( P < 0.001), tegmen tympani dehiscence ( P = 0.016) and semicircular canal dehiscence ( P < 0.001). Matrix was removed completely in 85.7% ( n = 12) and was left behind in 14.3% ( n = 2) of ears. Also, 21.5% ( n = 3) had preoperative dead ears. Postoperative hearing results had a mean follow-up time of 2.1 (standard deviation 1.5, range 0.14-4.84) years. In the matrix removal group ( n = 9), 77.9% had unchanged hearing levels, 11.1% showed improvement and 11.1% showed decrease in hearing levels. The matrix preservation group ( n = 2) had deteriorated hearing levels.
CONCLUSION: Preservation of hearing in LFs is possible with cautious matrix removal. Despite matrix preservation to preserve hearing in large LFs, our patients' hearing deteriorated postoperatively. Longer follow-up of hearing with matrix preservation may show poorer hearing outcomes.