镫骨手术后翻修:适应症、术中发现和手术策略方面的问题。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Pub Date : 2024-11-26 DOI:10.1007/s00405-024-09035-8
Kariem Sharaf, Ivo Grueninger, Sara Alekuzei, Daniel Polterauer, Andrea Schreier, Martin Canis, Tobias Rader, John Martin Hempel, Joachim Müller
{"title":"镫骨手术后翻修:适应症、术中发现和手术策略方面的问题。","authors":"Kariem Sharaf, Ivo Grueninger, Sara Alekuzei, Daniel Polterauer, Andrea Schreier, Martin Canis, Tobias Rader, John Martin Hempel, Joachim Müller","doi":"10.1007/s00405-024-09035-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Primary stapes surgery is considered a challenging intervention in ear surgery. Despite an risk of deafness in 0.5-1 percent, this procedure has still a good benefit-risk ratio due to the improvement in hearing and quality of life that is usually achieved. However, revision after prior stapes surgery is considered even more challenging. Revisions after stapes surgery are very heterogeneous procedures, both in terms of the indication and the surgical strategy and are generally considered to be significantly more demanding. Reasons for complications after prior stapes surgery as well as strategies for successful revisions are not well described in the literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective cohort study, tertiary referral center. 124 cases of revisions after prior stapes surgery were identified between 2011-2022 and are analyzed based on biographic data, clinical, audiological, and intraoperative findings as well as the eventual therapy. Cases were analyzed regarding indication, intraoperative finding and the surgical strategy chosen.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Acute, subacute, and long-term complications of the primary intervention as well as other incidental reasons such as progressive hearing loss can be identified as indication for revision surgery. Preoperative clinical findings were correlated to intraoperative findings and surgical strategies. Audiological results are discussed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Different recommendations for the indication of a surgical revision can be derived depending on the individual preoperative case history and findings. In addition, there are patterns regarding the chances of success of a revision, especially in cases of persistent conductive hearing loss chances of hearing improvement seem possible in more than 80% of cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":11952,"journal":{"name":"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisions after prior stapes surgery: aspects on indication, intraoperative findings and surgical strategies.\",\"authors\":\"Kariem Sharaf, Ivo Grueninger, Sara Alekuzei, Daniel Polterauer, Andrea Schreier, Martin Canis, Tobias Rader, John Martin Hempel, Joachim Müller\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00405-024-09035-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Primary stapes surgery is considered a challenging intervention in ear surgery. Despite an risk of deafness in 0.5-1 percent, this procedure has still a good benefit-risk ratio due to the improvement in hearing and quality of life that is usually achieved. However, revision after prior stapes surgery is considered even more challenging. Revisions after stapes surgery are very heterogeneous procedures, both in terms of the indication and the surgical strategy and are generally considered to be significantly more demanding. Reasons for complications after prior stapes surgery as well as strategies for successful revisions are not well described in the literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective cohort study, tertiary referral center. 124 cases of revisions after prior stapes surgery were identified between 2011-2022 and are analyzed based on biographic data, clinical, audiological, and intraoperative findings as well as the eventual therapy. Cases were analyzed regarding indication, intraoperative finding and the surgical strategy chosen.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Acute, subacute, and long-term complications of the primary intervention as well as other incidental reasons such as progressive hearing loss can be identified as indication for revision surgery. Preoperative clinical findings were correlated to intraoperative findings and surgical strategies. Audiological results are discussed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Different recommendations for the indication of a surgical revision can be derived depending on the individual preoperative case history and findings. In addition, there are patterns regarding the chances of success of a revision, especially in cases of persistent conductive hearing loss chances of hearing improvement seem possible in more than 80% of cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-09035-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-09035-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:原发性镫骨手术被认为是耳科手术中具有挑战性的干预措施。尽管耳聋的风险为 0.5-1%,但由于通常能改善听力和生活质量,这种手术的收益风险比仍然很高。然而,镫骨手术后的翻修被认为更具挑战性。镫骨手术后的翻修在适应症和手术策略方面都有很大差异,一般认为要求更高。关于镫骨手术后出现并发症的原因以及成功翻修的策略,文献中并没有很好的描述:回顾性队列研究,三级转诊中心。方法:回顾性队列研究,在 2011 年至 2022 年期间确定了 124 例镫骨手术后翻修病例,并根据病例的生物特征数据、临床、听力学和术中发现以及最终治疗方法进行分析。对病例的适应症、术中发现和选择的手术策略进行了分析:结果:初次干预的急性、亚急性和长期并发症,以及其他偶然原因,如进行性听力损失,都可作为翻修手术的适应症。术前临床发现与术中发现和手术策略相关。对听力结果进行了讨论:根据不同的术前病史和检查结果,可以得出不同的翻修手术适应症建议。此外,翻修手术的成功几率也有规律可循,尤其是对于持续性传导性听力损失病例,80% 以上的病例似乎都有可能改善听力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Revisions after prior stapes surgery: aspects on indication, intraoperative findings and surgical strategies.

Objective: Primary stapes surgery is considered a challenging intervention in ear surgery. Despite an risk of deafness in 0.5-1 percent, this procedure has still a good benefit-risk ratio due to the improvement in hearing and quality of life that is usually achieved. However, revision after prior stapes surgery is considered even more challenging. Revisions after stapes surgery are very heterogeneous procedures, both in terms of the indication and the surgical strategy and are generally considered to be significantly more demanding. Reasons for complications after prior stapes surgery as well as strategies for successful revisions are not well described in the literature.

Methods: Retrospective cohort study, tertiary referral center. 124 cases of revisions after prior stapes surgery were identified between 2011-2022 and are analyzed based on biographic data, clinical, audiological, and intraoperative findings as well as the eventual therapy. Cases were analyzed regarding indication, intraoperative finding and the surgical strategy chosen.

Results: Acute, subacute, and long-term complications of the primary intervention as well as other incidental reasons such as progressive hearing loss can be identified as indication for revision surgery. Preoperative clinical findings were correlated to intraoperative findings and surgical strategies. Audiological results are discussed.

Conclusions: Different recommendations for the indication of a surgical revision can be derived depending on the individual preoperative case history and findings. In addition, there are patterns regarding the chances of success of a revision, especially in cases of persistent conductive hearing loss chances of hearing improvement seem possible in more than 80% of cases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
537
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Official Journal of European Union of Medical Specialists – ORL Section and Board Official Journal of Confederation of European Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Head and Neck Surgery "European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology" publishes original clinical reports and clinically relevant experimental studies, as well as short communications presenting new results of special interest. With peer review by a respected international editorial board and prompt English-language publication, the journal provides rapid dissemination of information by authors from around the world. This particular feature makes it the journal of choice for readers who want to be informed about the continuing state of the art concerning basic sciences and the diagnosis and management of diseases of the head and neck on an international level. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology was founded in 1864 as "Archiv für Ohrenheilkunde" by A. von Tröltsch, A. Politzer and H. Schwartze.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Endoscopic ear surgery in the treatment of chronic otitis media with atelectasis. Correction: A novel olfactory sorting task. Cochlear implantation in patients with inner ear schwannomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis of audiological outcomes. Efficacy and safety of middle turbinate surgery: a systematic review. Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss after COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
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