Literature DB >> 21611723

Sensation recovery of auricle following chronic ear surgery by retroauricular incision.

Hung-Soo Kang1, Seong-Ki Ahn, Sea-Yuong Jeon, Dong Gu Hur, Jin-Pyeong Kim, Jung Je Park, Dae Woo Kim, Seung Hoon Woo.   

Abstract

The aim of this prospective analysis was to objectify and quantify the sensory loss in the auricular area that occurs following surgery for chronic otitis media or cholesteatoma, and to assess the exact recovery time of the auricular sensation. Till now, no study has yet been conducted on the sensory loss that is developed after retroauricular incision is performed for chronic ear surgery. Forty-eight patients underwent surgery via retroauricular incision for chronic otitis media or for chronic otitis media or cholesteatoma between March 2009 and January 2010. The skin around the auricle was divided into six areas. The sensation of each area was assessed before the surgery and 3 days, 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after the surgery, using the Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. The patients were also asked to record the sensation that they felt using the visual analog scale (VAS). In the objective sensory assessment, only area 5, which corresponds to the retroauricular area, showed significant sensory loss. Three months after the surgery, the sensation was recovered to a level comparable to that before the surgery in most of the patients. The mean subjective VAS score was 10 prior to the surgery, 8.56 (± 1.08) 3 months after the surgery, and 9.32 (± 0.74) 6 months after the surgery, respectively. In conclusion, following chronic ear surgery, the sensation of the auricle was recovered to the previous level within 3 months. Therefore, patients who are to undergo retroauricular incision should be informed that they will experience temporary sensory loss for approximately 3 months after the surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21611723     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-011-1638-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  14 in total

1.  Randomized prospective study of the validity of the great auricular nerve preservation in parotidectomy.

Authors:  Mauro Becker Martins Vieira; Amélio Ferreira Maia; Jaime Carlos Ribeiro
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2002-10

2.  Is it necessary to preserve the posterior branch of the great auricular nerve in parotidectomy?

Authors:  Hyun Jung Min; Hyung Seok Lee; Yong Seop Lee; Jin Hyeok Jeong; Seok Hyun Cho; Seung Hwan Lee; Kyung Rae Kim; Chul Won Park; Kyung Tae
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.497

3.  Normal values for sensory thresholds in the cervical dermatomes: a critical note on the use of Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments.

Authors:  V F Voerman; J van Egmond; B J Crul
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1999 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.159

4.  Accidental full thickness burn of the ear lobe following division of the great auricular nerve at parotidectomy.

Authors:  A M Brown; M J Wake
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 1.651

5.  Parotidectomy. Preserving the posterior branch of the great auricular nerve.

Authors:  N R Christensen; S D Jacobsen
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 1.469

6.  Facial sensibility testing in the normal and posttraumatic population.

Authors:  A Kesarwani; O Antonyshyn; S E Mackinnon; J S Gruss; C Novak; L Kelly
Journal:  Ann Plast Surg       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 1.539

7.  Pneumocephalus as a delayed mastoidectomy complication.

Authors:  F Jégoux; B Godey; L Riffaud; X Morandi
Journal:  J Laryngol Otol       Date:  2007-02-13       Impact factor: 1.469

8.  A prospective controlled double-blind trial of great auricular nerve preservation at parotidectomy.

Authors:  Yau Hui; David S Y Wong; Ling-Yuen Wong; Wai-Kuen Ho; William I Wei
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Long-term great auricular nerve morbidity after sacrifice during parotidectomy.

Authors:  William R Ryan; Willard E Fee
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  The Semmes-Weinstein monofilament as a potential predictor of foot ulceration in patients with noninsulin-dependent diabetes.

Authors:  P R Olmos; S Cataland; T M O'Dorisio; C A Casey; W L Smead; S R Simon
Journal:  Am J Med Sci       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 2.378

View more
  4 in total

1.  Sensation Loss of Auricle Following Ear Surgery by Post-auricular Incision: Our Experience.

Authors:  Sanket D Vakharia; Seema R Gupta
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2020-06-13

2.  Palatal sensory threshold reflects nocturnal hypoxemia and airway occlusion in snorers and obstructive sleep apnea patients.

Authors:  Sang-Wook Kim; Hyun Woo Park; Sung Jun Won; Sea-Yuong Jeon; Hong Ryul Jin; So-Jin Lee; Dong-Yeop Chang; Dae Woo Kim
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 4.062

3.  Patient satisfaction with postaural incision site.

Authors:  George Barrett; Susanne Koecher; Natalie Ronan; David Whinney
Journal:  Int J Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-09-24

4.  Comparison of the clinical outcome of endoscopic push-through myringoplasty and microscopic overlay myringoplasty: matching co-variated designs.

Authors:  Kanokkarn Mahawerawat; Pornthep Kasemsiri
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 2.102

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.