Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T13:55:35.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ossicular chain reconstruction: endoscopic or microscopic?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2021

E A Guneri  and
A Cakir Cetin
E A Guneri
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Dokuz Eylul University Medical School, Izmir, Turkey
A Cakir Cetin*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Dokuz Eylul University Medical School, Izmir, Turkey
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Asli Cakır Cetın, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Dokuz Eylul University Medical School, Balcova, Izmir35340, Turkey E-mail: [email protected] Fax: +90 232 4123269
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To compare the results of endoscopic and microscopic ossicular chain reconstruction surgery.

Methods

Patients undergoing ossicular chain reconstruction surgery via an endoscopic (n = 31) or microscopic (n = 34) technique were analysed for age, gender, Middle Ear Risk Index, ossicular chain defect, incision type, ossicular chain reconstruction surgery material, mean air conduction threshold, air–bone gap, air–bone gap gain, word recognition score, mean operation duration and mean post-operative follow up.

Results

Post-operative air conduction, air–bone gap and word recognition score improved significantly in both groups (within-subject p < 0.001 for air conduction and air–bone gap, and 0.026 for word recognition score); differences between groups were not significant (between-subject p = 0.192 for air conduction, 0.102 for air–bone gap, and 0.709 for word recognition score). Other parameters were similar between groups, except for incision type. However, endoscopic ossicular chain reconstruction surgery was associated with a significantly shorter operation duration (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Endoscopic ossicular chain reconstruction surgery can achieve comparable surgical and audiological outcomes to those of microscopic ossicular chain reconstruction surgery in a shorter time.

Keywords

Conductive Hearing LossEar OssiclesEndoscopeTympanoplasty
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 134 , Issue 12 , December 2020 , pp. 1108 - 1114
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Dr S Cakir Cetin takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Yawn, RJ, Hunter, JB, O'Connell, BP, Wanna, GB, Killeen, DE, Wick, CC et al. Audiometric outcomes following endoscopic ossicular chain reconstruction. Otol Neurotol 2017;38:1296–300CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kozin, ED, Gulati, S, Kaplan, AB, Lehmann, AE, Remenschneider, AK, Landegger, LD et al. Systematic review of outcomes following observational and operative endoscopic middle ear surgery. Laryngoscope 2015;125:1205–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhu, VF, Kou, YF, Lee, KH, Kutz, JW Jr, Isaacson, B. Transcanal endoscopic ear surgery for the management of congenital ossicular fixation. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:1071–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuo, CH, Wu, HM. Comparison of endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:2727–32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guneri, EA, Olgun, Y. Endoscope-assisted cochlear implantation. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2018;11:89–95CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guneri, EA, Olgun, Y. Endoscopic stapedotomy: our clinical experience. B-ENT 2018;14:161–7Google Scholar
Cox, MD, Page, JC, Trinidade, A, Dornhoffer, JL. Long-term complications and surgical failures after ossiculoplasty. Otol Neurotol 2017;38:1450–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsu, YC, Kuo, CL, Huang, TC. A retrospective comparative study of endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018;47:44CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, CC, Chen, YH, Yang, TH, Lin, KN, Lee, SY, Liu, TC et al. Endoscopic versus microscopic management of congenital ossicular chain anomalies: our experiences with 29 patients. Clin Otolaryngol 2017;42:944–50CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, E, Youngs, R, Hussain, M, Fishman, J. Training for emergencies, endoscopic ear surgery and post-tonsillectomy complications: beware ‘scary’ otolaryngology. J Laryngol Otol 2017;131:95CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennett, ML, Zhang, D, Labadie, RF, Noble, JH. Comparison of middle ear visualization with endoscopy and microscopy. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:362–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Austin, DF. Ossicular reconstruction. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1972;5:145–60CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kartush, JM. Ossicular chain reconstruction. Capitulum to malleus. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1994;27:689–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dornhoffer, JL, Gardner, E. Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty: a statistical staging system. Otol Neurotol 2001;22:299–304CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gurgel, RK, Jackler, RK, Dobie, RA, Popelka, GR. A new standardized format for reporting hearing outcome in clinical trials. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;147:803–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi, N, Noh, Y, Park, W, Lee, JJ, Yook, S, Choi, JE et al. Comparison of endoscopic tympanoplasty to microscopic tympanoplasty. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2017;10:44–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dundar, R, Kulduk, E, Soy, FK, Aslan, M, Hanci, D, Muluk, NB et al. Endoscopic versus microscopic approach to type 1 tympanoplasty in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014;78:1084–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huang, TY, Ho, KY, Wang, LF, Chien, CY, Wang, HM. A comparative study of endoscopic and microscopic approach type 1 tympanoplasty for simple chronic otitis media. J Int Adv Otol 2016;12:28–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaya, I, Sezgin, B, Sergin, D, Ozturk, A, Eraslan, S, Gode, S et al. Endoscopic versus microscopic type 1 tympanoplasty in the same patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:3343–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lailach, S, Zahnert, T, Neudert, M. Data and reporting quality in tympanoplasty and ossiculoplasty studies. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017;157:281–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Govil, N, Kaffenberger, TM, Shaffer, AD, Chi, DH. Factors influencing hearing outcomes in pediatric patients undergoing ossicular chain reconstruction. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2017;99:60–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demir, UL, Karaca, S, Ozmen, OA, Kasapoglu, F, Coskun, HH, Basut, O. Is it the middle ear disease or the reconstruction material that determines the functional outcome in ossicular chain reconstruction? Otol Neurotol 2012;33:580–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tarabichi, M, Ayache, S, Nogueira, JF, Al Qahtani, M, Pothier, DD. Endoscopic management of chronic otitis media and tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2013;46:155–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marchioni, D, Mattioli, F, Alicandri-Ciufelli, M, Presutti, L. Endoscopic approach to tensor fold in patients with attic cholesteatoma. Acta Otolaryngol 2009;129:946–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, S, Coulson, C. Endoscopic ear surgery: a hot topic? J Laryngol Otol 2017;131:117–22CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tseng, CC, Lai, MT, Wu, CC, Yuan, SP, Ding, YF. Comparison of the efficacy of endoscopic tympanoplasty and microscopic tympanoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Laryngoscope 2017;127:1890–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tseng, CC, Lai, MT, Wu, CC, Yuan, SP, Ding, YF. Cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic tympanoplasty versus microscopic tympanoplasty for chronic otitis media in Taiwan. J Chin Med Assoc 2018;81:284–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed