Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2019
Recidivism After Endoscopic Treatment of Cholesteatoma.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Killeen Daniel E, Tolisano Anthony M, Kou Yann Fuu, Kutz Joe Walter, Isaacson Brandon
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the recidivism rate of cholesteatoma treated via endoscopic ear surgery (EES), either via transcanal endoscopic ear surgery or endoscopic assisted tympanomastoidectomy compared with a microscopic postauricular approach.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review.
SETTING: Academic otology practice.
PATIENTS: Adult patients (18 years and older) with at least 11 months of surgical follow-up who were treated for cholesteatoma via endoscopic techniques or microscopic postauricular approach.
INTERVENTION: Use of the endoscope for cholesteatoma dissection.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Residual or recurrent cholesteatoma identified at second look surgery or postoperative diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients treated for cholesteatoma via endoscopic techniques and 35 patients treated via microscopic postauricular approach were analyzed. The endoscopic group required significantly fewer mastoid procedures (28% versus 80%, p-value 0.001). Postoperative changes in median ABG (5 dB versus 3.75 dB, p = 0.9519), median PTA (6.875 dB versus 1.25 dB, p = 0.3864), and median word recognition score (0% versus 0%, p = 0.3302) were not significantly different between the EES and microscopic surgery groups. Median operative times were not significantly different between the two groups (182 min endoscopic versus 174 min microscopic, p-value 0.66). The rate of residual disease (17% EES versus 17% microscopic, p = 0.959) or disease recurrence (18% endoscopic versus 20% microscopic, p = 0.816) were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: EES is an effective option for cholesteatoma management with similar rates of recurrent or residual disease as compared with the more traditional microscopic postauricular approach in these samples.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review.
SETTING: Academic otology practice.
PATIENTS: Adult patients (18 years and older) with at least 11 months of surgical follow-up who were treated for cholesteatoma via endoscopic techniques or microscopic postauricular approach.
INTERVENTION: Use of the endoscope for cholesteatoma dissection.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Residual or recurrent cholesteatoma identified at second look surgery or postoperative diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients treated for cholesteatoma via endoscopic techniques and 35 patients treated via microscopic postauricular approach were analyzed. The endoscopic group required significantly fewer mastoid procedures (28% versus 80%, p-value 0.001). Postoperative changes in median ABG (5 dB versus 3.75 dB, p = 0.9519), median PTA (6.875 dB versus 1.25 dB, p = 0.3864), and median word recognition score (0% versus 0%, p = 0.3302) were not significantly different between the EES and microscopic surgery groups. Median operative times were not significantly different between the two groups (182 min endoscopic versus 174 min microscopic, p-value 0.66). The rate of residual disease (17% EES versus 17% microscopic, p = 0.959) or disease recurrence (18% endoscopic versus 20% microscopic, p = 0.816) were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: EES is an effective option for cholesteatoma management with similar rates of recurrent or residual disease as compared with the more traditional microscopic postauricular approach in these samples.