Department of Audiology, Townsville Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
Department of Audiology, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Australia.
J Am Acad Audiol. 2020 Nov;31(10):708-718. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1719130. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
The objective of this study was to describe wideband absorbance (WBA) findings in patients with cholesteatomas and retraction pockets (RPs).
In this prospective study, tympanometry, audiometry, and wideband tympanometry (WBT) were performed on 27 ears with an RP (eight with epitympanic RP and 19 ears with mesotympanic RP), 39 ears with a cholesteatoma (23 ears with epitympanic and 16 ears with mesotympanic cholesteatomas [MCs]), and 49 healthy ears serving as controls.
Mean WBA at ambient pressure (WBA) of both experimental groups was reduced significantly between 0.8 and 5 kHz relative to the control group. The difference between mean WBA and mean WBA at tympanometric peak pressure (WBA) was greater for the RP (0.12-0.16 between 0.5 and 1.5 kHz) than for the cholesteatoma group (0.03-0.11 between 0.6 and 3 kHz). Mean WBA of both epitympanic RP (ERP) and epitympanic cholesteatoma (EC) subgroups was significantly lower than that of the control group. Mean WBA of the ERP subgroup attained normal levels as per the control group, while mean WBA of EC subgroup was significantly lower than that of the control group at 0.8 to 1.5 kHz and 4 to 5 kHz. In contrast, both mesotympanic RP and MC subgroups demonstrated similar mean WBA and WBA values. No significant differences in WBA and WBA results between the RP and cholesteatomas groups were observed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses indicated that the area under the ROC curve for distinguishing between the RP and cholesteatomas groups ranged from 0.44 to 0.60, indicating low accuracy in separating the two groups.
While it is not possible to distinguish between the RP and cholesteatomas groups based on the WBA and WBA results, it is potentially feasible to differentiate between the EC and ERP conditions. Further study using a large clinical sample is recommended to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the WBA test to identify the EC and ERP conditions.
本研究旨在描述胆脂瘤和回缩袋(RP)患者的宽带吸声(WBA)发现。
在这项前瞻性研究中,对 27 只具有 RP(8 只鼓室上 RP 和 19 只鼓室中 RP)、39 只胆脂瘤(23 只鼓室上胆脂瘤和 16 只鼓室中胆脂瘤[MCs])和 49 只健康耳朵进行了鼓室压测量、听力测试和宽带鼓室压测试(WBT)。
与对照组相比,两个实验组在环境压力下(WBA)的平均 WBA 在 0.8 至 5 kHz 之间显著降低。RP 组(0.5 至 1.5 kHz 之间为 0.12-0.16)与胆脂瘤组(0.6 至 3 kHz 之间为 0.03-0.11)之间的平均 WBA 与平均 WBA 在声压峰值下(WBA)之间的差异更大。鼓室上 RP(ERP)和鼓室上胆脂瘤(EC)亚组的平均 WBA 均明显低于对照组。ERP 亚组的平均 WBA 达到对照组的正常水平,而 EC 亚组的平均 WBA 在 0.8 至 1.5 kHz 和 4 至 5 kHz 时明显低于对照组。相比之下,中鼓室 RP 和 MC 亚组的平均 WBA 和 WBA 值相似。RP 和胆脂瘤组之间的 WBA 和 WBA 结果无显著差异。受试者工作特征(ROC)分析表明,用于区分 RP 和胆脂瘤组的 ROC 曲线下面积范围为 0.44 至 0.60,表明两组之间的区分准确性较低。
虽然无法根据 WBA 和 WBA 结果区分 RP 和胆脂瘤组,但有可能区分 EC 和 ERP 情况。建议使用更大的临床样本进一步研究,以确定 WBA 测试识别 EC 和 ERP 情况的灵敏度和特异性。