Department of Otolaryngology, Medical University of Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Feb;142(2):254-9. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2009.10.025.
Establish the time required to perform cochlear implantation (CI) in academic settings.
Historical cohort study.
German and American academic centers.
A total of 2639 patients underwent CI (1997-2007). We excluded patients receiving an experimental device or technique and those with abnormal cochlear anatomy or incomplete charts, leaving 2253 for analysis.
Unilateral, bilateral, and revision CI with devices approved in the U.S. and Europe.
Mean surgical time (ST) and total operating room time (TORT).
Mixed model analysis was used; estimated marginal means were calculated in minutes after adjusting for random effect of individual surgeon. There were no differences between unilateral (ST = 171, TORT = 245) and revision CI (ST = 160, TORT = 232), but bilateral procedures were longer (ST = 295, TORT = 377, P < 0.001). In unilateral surgeries, Cochlear Limited (CL) devices were implanted faster (ST = 165, TORT = 225) than Advanced Bionics (ABC) (ST = 183, P = 0.001; TORT = 240, P = 0.023) or MedEl (ST = 193, P < 0.001; TORT = 253, P = 0.002) devices. There were no differences for unilateral CI between ABC and MedEl devices. For revision CI, ABC devices (ST = 141, TORT = 219) were implanted faster than CL devices (ST = 181, P = 0.001; TORT = 266, P < 0.001). There were no differences by age group or between Germany and the U.S. ST and TORT were shorter for 575 CIs performed in the final two years of the study (unilateral CI: ST = 145, TORT = 209; bilateral CI: ST = 259, TORT = 330; revision CI: ST = 138, TORT = 205). For unilateral CI, ST and TORT decreased yearly (linear regression, P < 0.001) and inversely correlated with surgeon experience (linear regression, P < 0.01).
We report the time required to perform CI in academic settings-data that are vital for cost-benefit analyses and assessing new CI techniques.
确定在学术环境中进行人工耳蜗植入(CI)所需的时间。
历史队列研究。
德国和美国的学术中心。
共有 2639 名患者接受了 CI(1997-2007 年)。我们排除了接受实验性设备或技术的患者以及耳蜗解剖结构异常或图表不完整的患者,留下 2253 名患者进行分析。
单侧、双侧和使用美国和欧洲批准的设备进行的修正性 CI。
平均手术时间(ST)和总手术室时间(TORT)。
使用混合模型分析;在调整个体外科医生的随机效应后,以分钟为单位计算估计的边缘平均值。单侧(ST=171,TORT=245)和修正性 CI(ST=160,TORT=232)之间没有差异,但双侧手术时间更长(ST=295,TORT=377,P<0.001)。在单侧手术中,科利尔有限公司(CL)设备的植入速度更快(ST=165,TORT=225),而先进仿生公司(ABC)(ST=183,P=0.001;TORT=240,P=0.023)或美敦力(MedEl)(ST=193,P<0.001;TORT=253,P=0.002)设备。ABC 和 MedEl 设备之间在单侧 CI 方面没有差异。对于修正性 CI,ABC 设备(ST=141,TORT=219)的植入速度快于 CL 设备(ST=181,P=0.001;TORT=266,P<0.001)。在研究的最后两年进行的 575 例 CI 中,年龄组之间或德国和美国之间的 ST 和 TORT 没有差异(单侧 CI:ST=145,TORT=209;双侧 CI:ST=259,TORT=330;修正性 CI:ST=138,TORT=205)。对于单侧 CI,ST 和 TORT 每年都在减少(线性回归,P<0.001),并且与外科医生的经验呈负相关(线性回归,P<0.01)。
我们报告了在学术环境中进行 CI 所需的时间-这对于成本效益分析和评估新的 CI 技术至关重要。