Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2011
Revision stapes surgery.
Сравнительное 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.
Ozüer Mehmet Ziya, Olgun Levent, Gültekin Gürol
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Surgery for otosclerosis has a highly satisfactory hearing outcome, for both the patient and the otologic surgeon. However, subsequent conductive hearing loss, dizziness/vertigo, or sound distortion could necessitate revision surgery. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the surgical findings and hearing outcomes of 84 revision stapes surgeries.
STUDY DESIGN: Case series with chart review.
SETTING: Tertiary referral center.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: At our institution, 84 revision cases were performed between 1998 and 2009. Conductive hearing loss was the revision indication in 69 cases, severe dizziness/vertigo in 8 patients, sound distortion in 5 cases, and progressive hearing loss with dizziness in 2 patients. Operative findings were noted in every case and evaluated separately.
RESULTS: Surgical intervention revealed problems related to prosthesis in 51 cases, fibrotic bands in 26 cases, adhesions in 13 cases, incus necrosis in 15 cases, perilymphatic fistula in 3 cases, intact footplate in 5 cases, incus-malleus fixation in 2 cases, and reobliteration in 2 cases. Mean follow-up period was 19 months (range, 12-53 months). Successful hearing results (air-bone gap <10 dB) were reached in 58% of the cases, and satisfactory hearing results (air-bone gap <20 dB) were reached in 71% of the cases.
CONCLUSIONS: The ideal patient for revision stapes surgery is one who benefits from the initial surgery but complained of conductive hearing loss. In the present study, improvement in pure-tone average was 13.2 dB, and the mean air-bone gap was 9.6 dB.
STUDY DESIGN: Case series with chart review.
SETTING: Tertiary referral center.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: At our institution, 84 revision cases were performed between 1998 and 2009. Conductive hearing loss was the revision indication in 69 cases, severe dizziness/vertigo in 8 patients, sound distortion in 5 cases, and progressive hearing loss with dizziness in 2 patients. Operative findings were noted in every case and evaluated separately.
RESULTS: Surgical intervention revealed problems related to prosthesis in 51 cases, fibrotic bands in 26 cases, adhesions in 13 cases, incus necrosis in 15 cases, perilymphatic fistula in 3 cases, intact footplate in 5 cases, incus-malleus fixation in 2 cases, and reobliteration in 2 cases. Mean follow-up period was 19 months (range, 12-53 months). Successful hearing results (air-bone gap <10 dB) were reached in 58% of the cases, and satisfactory hearing results (air-bone gap <20 dB) were reached in 71% of the cases.
CONCLUSIONS: The ideal patient for revision stapes surgery is one who benefits from the initial surgery but complained of conductive hearing loss. In the present study, improvement in pure-tone average was 13.2 dB, and the mean air-bone gap was 9.6 dB.