Literature DB >> 22595461

Minimal access and standard cochlear implantation: a comparative study.

Jeremy D Prager1, Marci J Neidich, Jonathan N Perkins, Jareen Meinzen-Derr, John H Greinwald.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the operative times and complications between patients who underwent minimal access cochlear implantation and standard technique cochlear implantation.
METHODS: Patients who underwent unilateral cochlear implantation by a single surgeon from 2001 to 2010. The minimal access technique of an approximately 2.5-3 cm post-auricular incision with creation of subperiosteal pocket for the device was compared to the longer standard "S" incision into the scalp (~8-10 cm) with bone well creation and suture fixation. Outcomes include operative times and complications.
RESULTS: There were 122 unilateral implants, 73 (59.8%) in the minimal access group and 49 (40.2%) in the standard group. Mean total time in the operating room was lower in the minimal access group compared to the standard group (200±31 vs. 255±49 min, p<.0001) as well as mean operative time (149.5±28 vs. 200±45 min, p<.0001 respectively). There were 17 complications in the entire cohort with 8 and 9 complications in the minimal and standard groups respectively. Of the 17 complications, 12 were surgical technique-specific. Although it appeared that there were higher rates of major, technique-specific, and overall complications in the standard access group, these differences did not reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing minimal access cochlear implantation require shorter operative times when compared to the standard access cochlear implantation. In addition, low complication rates are observed for major, technique-specific, and overall complications. Minimal access cochlear implantation may be considered an equivalent and potentially superior technique.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22595461     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.04.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0165-5876            Impact factor:   1.675


  5 in total

1.  Scar evaluation in subperiosteal temporal pocket versus the one-layer flap technique in cochlear implantation using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale.

Authors:  Berat Demir; Adem Binnetoglu; Ulker Mammodova; Caglar Batman
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Cochlear Implantation in Pediatric Patients: Comparison of Limited-Incision and Standard Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Mahmood Shishegar; Seyed Basir Hashemi
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2014-11-19

3.  Association of the Duration of Antibiotic Therapy With Major Surgical Site Infection in Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Achraf Sayed-Hassan; Ruben Hermann; Frédéric Chidiac; Eric Truy; Nicolas Guevara; Sonanda Bailleux; Olivier Deguine; Blandine Baladi; Yohan Gallois; Alexis Bozorg-Grayeli; Yannick Lerosey; Benoit Godey; Cécile Parietti-Winkler; Bruno Pereira; Thierry Mom
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 6.223

4.  Delayed-onset swelling around the implant after cochlear implantation: a series of 26 patients.

Authors:  Fan Shu; Minyun Yao; Yimeng Liu; Jieqing Cai; Muqing Xu; Shanshan Jiang; Xinyuan Tan; Jie Tang; Hongzheng Zhang
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-07-23       Impact factor: 3.236

5.  Evaluation of the Digisonic® SP cochlear implant: patient outcomes and fixation system with titanium screws.

Authors:  Guilherme Machado de Carvalho; Alexandre Caixeta Guimarães; Fabiana Danieli; Lúcia Cristina Beltrame Onuki; Jorge Rizzato Paschoal; Walter Adriano Bianchini; Arthur Menino Castilho
Journal:  Braz J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-12
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.