Literature DB >> 21178807

Revision aural atresia surgery: indications and outcomes.

Eric R Oliver1, Brian B Hughley, David C Shonka, Bradley W Kesser.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the most common indications for revision congenital aural atresia (CAA) surgery and the postoperative healing and hearing outcomes of revision surgery. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective case review.
SETTING: Tertiary care academic otologic practice. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing revision surgery for CAA. INTERVENTION: Revision surgery for CAA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Indications for revision atresiaplasty, time to revision surgery, postoperative external auditory canal (EAC) patency, incidence of chronic drainage and/or infection, and postoperative speech reception thresholds (SRTs), and air-bone gaps.
RESULTS: Indications for 75 ears (69 patients) undergoing 107 revision operations for CAA included 58% for EAC stenosis, 19% for chronic drainage and/or infection, and 20% for conductive hearing loss (CHL) alone. Fifty ears (67%) required a single revision. Twenty-five ears (33%) required more than 1 revision. With follow-up longer than 3 months (mean, 41 mo), 69% of ears revised for EAC stenosis achieved a patent canal (29% required >1 revision); 75% of ears revised for chronic drainage and/or infection (mean follow-up, 53 mo) realized a dry canal (22% required >1 revision). For all revision surgeries with adequate follow-up (n = 80), the mean postoperative short-term SRT of 24 dB HL was a significant improvement from the mean preoperative SRT of 39 dB HL (p < 0.01, paired t test).
CONCLUSION: EAC stenosis is the most common indication for revision atresiaplasty. Despite the challenges of revision surgery, improvement in canal patency, epithelialization, and hearing utcomes can be achieved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21178807     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182015f27

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  5 in total

1.  A New Flap Technique for Reconstruction of Microtia and Congenital Aural Atresia.

Authors:  Kun Chen; Chenyan Jiang; Qingwei Wu; Yiyuan Sun; Runjie Shi
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 0.656

2.  Individualized, Additively Manufactured Drug-Releasing External Ear Canal Implant for Prevention of Postoperative Restenosis: Development, In Vitro Testing, and Proof of Concept in an Individual Curative Trial.

Authors:  Farnaz Matin-Mann; Ziwen Gao; Jana Schwieger; Martin Ulbricht; Vanessa Domsta; Stefan Senekowitsch; Werner Weitschies; Anne Seidlitz; Katharina Doll; Meike Stiesch; Thomas Lenarz; Verena Scheper
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 6.525

3.  Semiautomated Middle Ear Volume Measurement as a Predictor of Postsurgical Outcomes for Congenital Aural Atresia.

Authors:  S J Kabadi; D S Ruhl; S Mukherjee; B W Kesser
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Vibrant soundbridge in aural atresia: does severity matter?

Authors:  B J McKinnon; T Dumon; R Hagen; E Lesinskas; R Mlynski; M Profant; J Spindel; J Van Beek-King; M Zernotti
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 5.  [Hearing rehabilitation with the Vibrant Soundbridge in patients with congenital middle ear malformation].

Authors:  J M Hempel; A Epp; V Volgger
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2021-02-18       Impact factor: 1.284

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.