HNO · 2008
[Significance of computed tomography evaluation before revision stapes surgery].
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Röösli C, Hoffmann A, Treumann T, Linder T E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Stapedectomy and, more recently, stapedotomy have been widely accepted as the primary surgical techniques to improve conductive hearing in patients suffering from otosclerosis. Unsuccessful outcomes are infrequent, but revision surgery may become necessary. We have analyzed the value of computed tomography (CT) scanning following unsuccessful stapes surgery.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a total of 37 CT scans, the depth of insertion, angle between prosthesis and footplate, location of prosthesis within the oval niche, visibility of the prosthesis, dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal, and extent of otospongiotic foci were evaluated and compared with the audiometric results.
RESULTS: There was no significant correlation between CT parameters and audiologic results, except for patients with cochlear otosclerosis or lateral dislocation of the piston. One previously unknown dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal was diagnosed. Otospongiotic foci were seen in 13 ears (35%).
CONCLUSION: Displacements of the stapes piston and rare causes for an insufficient result, such as a dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal, can be diagnosed accurately by CT. However, correlation between the audiologic results and the findings on CT scans was possible in only a few cases. Nevertheless, CT scans provide additional information for surgical planning in revision stapes surgery and may become increasingly important to reduce unanticipated intraoperative risks; they may even guide the surgeon not to perform unnecessary revision surgeries.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a total of 37 CT scans, the depth of insertion, angle between prosthesis and footplate, location of prosthesis within the oval niche, visibility of the prosthesis, dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal, and extent of otospongiotic foci were evaluated and compared with the audiometric results.
RESULTS: There was no significant correlation between CT parameters and audiologic results, except for patients with cochlear otosclerosis or lateral dislocation of the piston. One previously unknown dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal was diagnosed. Otospongiotic foci were seen in 13 ears (35%).
CONCLUSION: Displacements of the stapes piston and rare causes for an insufficient result, such as a dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal, can be diagnosed accurately by CT. However, correlation between the audiologic results and the findings on CT scans was possible in only a few cases. Nevertheless, CT scans provide additional information for surgical planning in revision stapes surgery and may become increasingly important to reduce unanticipated intraoperative risks; they may even guide the surgeon not to perform unnecessary revision surgeries.