Outcome of Limited Attic Cholesteatoma Surgery: Endoscopic vs Microscopic

IF 0.1 Q4 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY Bangladesh Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Pub Date : 2022-07-20 DOI:10.3329/bjo.v28i1.60834
Md Shah Sakender, M. Alam, Md. Lutfor Rahaman, Sabyasachi Talukdar, Murshedur Rahaman, Mohammad Nazrul Islam
{"title":"Outcome of Limited Attic Cholesteatoma Surgery: Endoscopic vs Microscopic","authors":"Md Shah Sakender, M. Alam, Md. Lutfor Rahaman, Sabyasachi Talukdar, Murshedur Rahaman, Mohammad Nazrul Islam","doi":"10.3329/bjo.v28i1.60834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Endoscope and microscope are exclusively used in different middle ear pathologies as well as patients with attic cholesteatoma. However, straightforward information regarding surgical advances, postoperative results, and information about in which patients and how this surgical technique should be exclusively used is debatable. \nAim: To compare the outcome of primary exclusive endoscopic ear surgery with those of the microscopic ear surgery in two groups of patients with cholesteatoma limited to the attic region. \nMethods: This prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, BSMMU, Dhaka, from July 2018 to December 2019, with 26 patients having cholesteatoma limited to the attic region. Patients were divided into two groups. One group of patients were submitted to atticotomy with tympanoplasty via microscopic ear surgery (MES) and a second group to exclusive trans-canal endoscopic ear surgery (EES). All the patients were followed up post-operatively up to 3 months with PTA. \nResults: Mean bone conduction threshold, air conduction threshold, and ABG has been reduced considerably in both groups (endoscopic and microscopic) at the end of three months postoperatively.There was no significant statistical difference between the two groups in terms of graft uptake success rate and the audiological success rate (p-value >0.05).Postoperatively, pain requiring analgesics wassignificantly lower (p<0.033) in theendoscopic group (23.1%) than in the microscopic group (69.2%). \nConclusion: Audiological outcome and graft uptake success rates achieved by the endoscopic ear surgery were similar to the results obtained by the microscopic ear surgery in limited attic cholesteatoma. \nBangladesh J Otorhinolaryngol 2022; 28(1): 103-111","PeriodicalId":53915,"journal":{"name":"Bangladesh Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bangladesh Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/bjo.v28i1.60834","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Endoscope and microscope are exclusively used in different middle ear pathologies as well as patients with attic cholesteatoma. However, straightforward information regarding surgical advances, postoperative results, and information about in which patients and how this surgical technique should be exclusively used is debatable. Aim: To compare the outcome of primary exclusive endoscopic ear surgery with those of the microscopic ear surgery in two groups of patients with cholesteatoma limited to the attic region. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, BSMMU, Dhaka, from July 2018 to December 2019, with 26 patients having cholesteatoma limited to the attic region. Patients were divided into two groups. One group of patients were submitted to atticotomy with tympanoplasty via microscopic ear surgery (MES) and a second group to exclusive trans-canal endoscopic ear surgery (EES). All the patients were followed up post-operatively up to 3 months with PTA. Results: Mean bone conduction threshold, air conduction threshold, and ABG has been reduced considerably in both groups (endoscopic and microscopic) at the end of three months postoperatively.There was no significant statistical difference between the two groups in terms of graft uptake success rate and the audiological success rate (p-value >0.05).Postoperatively, pain requiring analgesics wassignificantly lower (p<0.033) in theendoscopic group (23.1%) than in the microscopic group (69.2%). Conclusion: Audiological outcome and graft uptake success rates achieved by the endoscopic ear surgery were similar to the results obtained by the microscopic ear surgery in limited attic cholesteatoma. Bangladesh J Otorhinolaryngol 2022; 28(1): 103-111
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
局限性阁楼胆脂瘤手术的结果:内镜与显微镜
背景:内镜和显微镜专门用于不同的中耳病变以及阁楼胆脂瘤患者。然而,关于手术进展、术后结果的直接信息,以及关于哪些患者以及如何专门使用这种手术技术的信息,都是有争议的。目的:比较两组局限于阁楼区域的胆脂瘤患者的原发性内镜下耳道手术与镜下耳道术的疗效。方法:这项前瞻性观察性研究于2018年7月至2019年12月在达卡BSMMU耳鼻咽喉头颈外科进行,共有26名胆脂瘤患者局限于阁楼区域。患者被分为两组。一组患者通过显微镜下耳部手术(MES)接受鼓室成形术,另一组患者接受经耳道内镜下耳内窥镜手术(EES)。所有患者均接受PTA术后随访,随访时间长达3个月。结果:术后三个月,两组(内镜和显微镜)的平均骨传导阈值、空气传导阈值和ABG均显著降低。两组移植物吸收成功率和听力学成功率差异无统计学意义(p值>0.05),内窥镜组(23.1%)的镇痛需求明显低于显微镜组(69.2%)(p<0.033)。孟加拉国耳鼻喉科杂志2022;28(1):103-111
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Prevalence of Recurrence in Early Tongue Cancer T1 or T2 with or Without Neck Dissection A Case of Familial Hypocalciuric Hypercalcemia Comparative Study of Temporalis Fascial Graft Medial or Lateral to Handle of Malleus in Tympanoplasty Pathophysiological Effect of Enlarged Adenoid on Middle Ear in Children Repair of Surgical Defect by Pectoralis Major Flap Versus Free Radial Forearm Flap in Buccal Carcinoma: Assessment of Quality of Life
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1