medigraphic.com
Anales de Otorrinolaringología Mexicana

2025, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Otorrinolaringología 2025; 70 (1)

Reduction of the postsurgical bone-air gap in relation to the difference in the length of the prosthesis and the measurement of the stapes in tomography

Armenta BJ, Rey EA, Álvarez KH, Moisés HJF

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 17-24
PDF size: 297.75 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objectives: To determine if a smaller difference in the length of the prosthesis selected in surgery and the stapes measurement in tomography is related to greater closure of the bone-air gap in post-surgical audiometry.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective, longitudinal, observational and analytical review of records and paraclinical studies of patients postoperatively after stapedotomy was carried out, which were subsequently captured and an analysis was performed in relation to the data obtained.
Results: The relationship between the prosthesis-stapes difference and the closure of the bone-air gap after surgery was verified with a statistically significant result (p ‹ 0.001).
Conclusions: Stapes surgery is considered safe with an adequate success rate. However, since one of the main causes of failure is the inaccurate length of the prosthesis, it is recommended to integrate the measurement of the stapes in pre-surgical tomography as part of the protocol in order to reduce the failure rate and complications of the surgery.


REFERENCES

  1. Quesnel AM, Ishai R, McKenna MJ. Otosclerosis: Temporal bone pathology. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2018; 51 (2): 291-303. http://doi.org.10.1016/j.otc.2017.11.001

  2. Tavernier LJM, Fransen E, Valgaeren H, Van Camp G. Genetics of otosclerosis: finally catching up withother complex traits? Hum Genet 2022; 141 (3-4): 939-50. http://doi.org.10.1007/s00439-021-02357-1

  3. Batson L, Rizzolo D. Otosclerosis: An update on diagnosis and treatment. JAAPA 2017; 30 (2): 17- 22. http://doi.org.10.1097/01.JAA.0000511784.21936.1b

  4. Ricci G, Gambacorta V, Lapenna R, Della Volpe A, et al. The effect of female hormone in otosclerosis. Acomparative study and speculation about their effect on the ossicular chain based on the clinical results. EurArch Otorhinolaryngol 2022; 279 (10): 4831-8. http://doi.org.10.1007/s00405-022-07295-w

  5. Zafar N, Hohman MH, Khan MAB. Otosclerosis. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing2024, StatPearls Publishing LLC.

  6. Linthicum FH, Jr. Histopathology of otosclerosis. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1993; 26 (3): 335-52.

  7. Cherukupally SR, Merchant SN, Rosowski JJ. Correlations between pathologic changes in the stapesand conductive hearing loss in otosclerosis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1998; 107 (4): 319-26. http://doi.org.10.1177/000348949810700410

  8. Foster MF, Backous DD. Clinical evaluation of the patient with otosclerosis. Otolaryngol Clin North Am2018; 51 (2): 319-26. http://doi.org.10.1016/j.otc.2017.11.004

  9. Nourollahian M, Irani S. Bilateral Schwartze sign, decision-making for surgery. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol2013; 25 (73): 263.

  10. Chole RA, Cook GB. The Rinne test for conductive deafness: A critical reappraisal. Arch Otolaryngol HeadNeck Surg 1988; 114 (4): 399-403. http://doi.org.10.1001/archotol.1988.01860160043018

  11. Keefe DH, Archer KL, Schmid KK, Fitzpatrick DF, et al. Identifying otosclerosis with aural acoustical testsof absorbance, group delay, acoustic reflex threshold, and otoacoustic emissions. J Am Acad Audiol 2017; 28(9): 838-60. http://doi.org.10.3766/jaaa.16172

  12. Kösling S, Brandt S, Bloching M, Böhme S. [Indications of HR-CT in the early postoperative phase of stapedotomy].Rofo 2004; 176 (8): 1122-6. http://doi.org.10.1055/s-2004-813193

  13. Gogoulos PP, Sideris G, Nikolopoulos T, Sevastatou EK, et al. Conservative otosclerosis treatment withsodium fluoride and other modern formulations: A systematic review. Cureus 2023; 15 (2): e34850. http://doi.org.10.7759/cureus.34850

  14. Thomas JP, Minovi A, Dazert S. Current aspects of etiology, diagnosis, and therapy of otosclerosis. OtolaryngolPol 2011; 65: 162-70. http://doi.org.10.1016/S0030-6657(11)70670-9

  15. Cheng HCS, Agrawal SK, Parnes LS. Stapedectomy versus stapedotomy. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2018;51 (2): 375-92. http://doi.org.10.1016/j.otc.2017.11.008

  16. Gosselin E, Elblidi A, Alhabib SF, Nader ME, et al. Predictable prosthesis length on a high-resolution CTscan before a stapedotomy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 275 (9): 2219-26. http://doi.org.10.1007/s00405-018-5075-4

  17. Odat H, Kanaan Y, Alali M, Al-Qudah M. Hearing results after stapedotomy for otosclerosis: comparisonof prosthesis variables. J Laryngol Otol 2021; 135 (1): 28-32. http://doi.org.10.1017/S0022215120002595

  18. Bakhos D, Lescanne E, Charretier C, Robier A. A review of 89 revision stapes surgeries for otosclerosis.Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 2010; 127 (5): 177-82. http://doi.org.10.1016/j.anorl.2010.07.012

  19. De Bruijn AJG. Clinical and audiological aspects of stapes surgery in otosclerosis: Universiteit van Amsterdam[Host]; 2000.

  20. Marchica CL, Saliba I. The relationship between stapes prosthesis length and rate of stapedectomy success.Clin Med Insights Ear Nose Throat 2015; 8: 23-31. http://doi.org.10.4137/CMent.s27284




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com