Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Laryngol Otol. 2021 May;135(5):410-414. doi: 10.1017/S0022215121000293. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
This study aimed to compare the necessary scutum defect for transmeatal visualisation of middle-ear landmarks between an endoscopic and microscopic approach.
Human cadaveric heads were used. In group 1, middle-ear landmarks were visualised by endoscope (group 1 endoscopic approach) and subsequently by microscope (group 1 microscopic approach following endoscopy). In group 2, landmarks were visualised solely microscopically (group 2 microscopic approach). The amount of resected bone was evaluated via computed tomography scans.
In the group 1 endoscopic approach, a median of 6.84 mm3 bone was resected. No statistically significant difference (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.163, U = 49.000) was found between the group 1 microscopic approach following endoscopy (median 17.84 mm3) and the group 2 microscopic approach (median 20.08 mm3), so these were combined. The difference between the group 1 endoscopic approach and the group 1 microscopic approach following endoscopy plus group 2 microscopic approach (median 18.16 mm3) was statistically significant (Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.001, U = 18.000).
This study showed that endoscopic transmeatal visualisation of middle-ear landmarks preserves more of the bony scutum than a microscopic transmeatal approach.
本研究旨在比较经耳内镜和显微镜两种方法观察中耳解剖标志时所需的最小鼓膜缺损。
本研究使用了人类尸体头颅。在第 1 组中，通过内镜（第 1 组内镜方法）和随后的显微镜（内镜后第 1 组显微镜方法）观察中耳解剖标志。在第 2 组中，仅通过显微镜（第 2 组显微镜方法）观察解剖标志。通过计算机断层扫描评估切除的骨量。
在第 1 组内镜方法中，切除的骨量中位数为 6.84mm3。经内镜的第 1 组显微镜方法（中位数 17.84mm3）和第 2 组显微镜方法（中位数 20.08mm3）之间无统计学差异（Mann-Whitney U 检验，p = 0.163，U = 49.000），因此将其合并。第 1 组内镜方法与经内镜的第 1 组显微镜方法加第 2 组显微镜方法（中位数 18.16mm3）之间的差异具有统计学意义（Mann-Whitney U 检验，p < 0.001，U = 18.000）。
本研究表明，经耳内镜观察中耳解剖标志比经显微镜观察可保留更多的鼓膜骨质。
