Suppr超能文献

耳内镜镫骨手术中的微钻:安全吗?

Microdrill in endoscopic stapes surgery: Is it safe?

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.

McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.

出版信息

Am J Otolaryngol. 2020 Nov-Dec;41(6):102666. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102666. Epub 2020 Aug 12.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To assess the safety of using a microdrill in endoscopic vs microscopic stapes surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 29 adult ears with otosclerosis who underwent either an endoscopic or microscopic approach to microdrill stapedotomy.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Determine if transcanal endoscopic stapes surgery with the microdrill is as safe as microscopic stapes surgery. Secondary outcome: Bone and air pure-tone averages, air-bone gap, speech discrimination, overall surgical cost, and operative time were measured and analyzed. Complications such as post-operative dysgeusia, vertigo, readmission, revision and hearing loss were noted.

RESULTS

29 patients with otosclerosis were retrospectively reviewed, in total 14 endoscopic and 15 microscopic approaches were included, all performed over one-year period. None of the endoscopic surgeries require conversion to the microscope. No statistically significant audiometric differences between the endoscopic vs microscopic approaches in air pure-tone averages and air-bone gap. There were 82.8% air-bone gap closure to <15 dB with no significant difference in the percent of such closures between the endoscopic (85.7%) and microscopic groups (80%, P = .68). Three prostheses were used: 4.25 mm (17.2%), 4.5 mm (58.6%) and the 4.75 mm (24.1%) smart/eclipse. Endoscopic median operative time was 51 min vs 42 min for microscopic approach (P =.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The endoscopic with microdrill approach is criticized to lack depth perception, especially when using a microdrill to perform in stapedotomies. Our study showcases that using the microdrill use produces minimal differences in outcomes, cost, and is a safe modality to stapes surgery in both approaches.

摘要

目的

评估在内镜与显微镜下使用微型钻头进行镫骨手术的安全性。

材料与方法

对 29 例耳硬化症成人患者进行回顾性研究,这些患者接受了内镜或显微镜下的微型钻头镫骨切开术。

主要结果

确定经耳道内镜镫骨手术中使用微型钻头是否与显微镜下镫骨手术一样安全。次要结果:测量和分析骨气导平均值、气骨导差值、言语辨别率、总手术费用和手术时间。记录并注意术后味觉障碍、眩晕、再入院、翻修和听力损失等并发症。

结果

回顾性分析 29 例耳硬化症患者,共包括 14 例内镜和 15 例显微镜手术,均在一年内完成。没有内镜手术需要转为显微镜手术。内镜与显微镜手术在骨气导平均值和气骨导差值方面无统计学差异。气骨导差值<15dB 的闭合率为 82.8%,内镜组(85.7%)和显微镜组(80%,P=0.68)之间无显著差异。使用了三种假体:4.25mm(17.2%)、4.5mm(58.6%)和 4.75mm(24.1%)的 smart/eclipse。内镜组的平均手术时间为 51 分钟,显微镜组为 42 分钟(P=0.004)。

结论

使用微型钻头的内镜方法被批评为缺乏深度感知,尤其是在进行镫骨切开术时。我们的研究表明,使用微型钻头在两种方法中对结果、成本影响最小,是一种安全的镫骨手术方式。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验