Department of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA; Division of Pediatric Otolaryngology, Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA; Division of Pediatric Otolaryngology, Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Feb;141:110551. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2020.110551. Epub 2020 Dec 10.
Patients with microtia and aural atresia have multiple options for treatment of conductive hearing loss (CHL) and auricle reconstruction; however, little is known about the factors influencing treatment selection. This study aims to review the socioeconomic and clinical data of microtia/atresia patients to evaluate congruency with national data and whether these factors affect treatment decisions.
Retrospective review of patients evaluated in the microtia and atresia multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) at a tertiary academic children's hospital between 2008 and 2018. Outcomes included demographic, socioeconomic and clinical factors associated with hearing surgery and framework surgery.
373 patients were seen in the Microtia MDC: 193 (51.7%) were male, 187 (50.1%) identified as Hispanic and 23 (6.2%) identified as Asian. 267 (75.6%) patients received a nonsurgical bone conduction hearing device (BCHD); fitting at a younger age was associated with better nonsurgical BCHD compliance. Multivariate analysis was performed on the patients that were eligible for surgery based on age and appropriate follow-up. 70 (18.8%) patients had placement of an osseointegrated BCHD; inconsistent compliance with nonsurgical BCHD decreased the odds of proceeding with osseointegrated BCHD placement. 60 (16.1%) patients underwent framework surgery for external reconstruction. Placement of osseointegrated BCHD was the only factor that was associated with proceeding with framework surgery. Other assessed demographic and socioeconomic factors were statistically not associated with selection of surgical intervention.
Fitting a nonsurgical BCHD at a younger age is associated with higher likelihood of nonsurgical BCHD compliance, that is in turn associated with patients and families proceeding with osseointegrated BCHD and framework surgery.
患有小耳畸形和听骨闭锁的患者有多种治疗传导性听力损失(CHL)和耳廓重建的选择;然而,对于影响治疗选择的因素知之甚少。本研究旨在回顾小耳畸形/闭锁患者的社会经济和临床数据,评估与全国数据的一致性,以及这些因素是否影响治疗决策。
对 2008 年至 2018 年在三级学术儿童医院的小耳畸形多学科诊所(MDC)接受评估的患者进行回顾性研究。结果包括与听力手术和框架手术相关的人口统计学、社会经济和临床因素。
373 例患者在小耳畸形 MDC 就诊:193 例(51.7%)为男性,187 例(50.1%)为西班牙裔,23 例(6.2%)为亚洲裔。267 例(75.6%)患者接受了非手术骨导听力设备(BCHD);较小年龄时的适配与更好的非手术 BCHD 依从性相关。根据年龄和适当的随访情况,对符合手术条件的患者进行了多变量分析。70 例(18.8%)患者植入了骨整合 BCHD;非手术 BCHD 依从性不一致降低了进行骨整合 BCHD 植入的可能性。60 例(16.1%)患者接受了外部重建框架手术。植入骨整合 BCHD 是唯一与进行框架手术相关的因素。其他评估的人口统计学和社会经济因素在统计学上与手术干预的选择无关。
在较小年龄时适配非手术 BCHD 与较高的非手术 BCHD 依从性相关,这反过来又与患者和家属选择骨整合 BCHD 和框架手术相关。