Laser vs drill for footplate fenestration during stapedotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of hearing results.
Drill stapedotomy
Laser stapedotomy
Stapedotomy
Stapedotomy meta-analysis
Stapedotomy review
Journal
European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
ISSN: 1434-4726
Titre abrégé: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9002937
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2021
Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
15
04
2020
accepted:
06
06
2020
pubmed:
15
6
2020
medline:
24
2
2021
entrez:
15
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Stapes surgery is the gold standard surgical treatment nowadays for otosclerosis. Several controversies on the procedure have been reported; surgical techniques for most favorable outcomes are still on discussion. The objective of this study is to present an update of evidence-based medicine concerning the utilization of lasers and drilling for footplate fenestration during stapedotomy surgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Publications in English in the last 5 years were searched in the PubMed/MEDLINE database and were systematically reviewed. A total of three articles were included according to the inclusion criteria, obtaining a total of 1531 patients managed surgically for otosclerosis, using laser or drill for footplate fenestration. Data were systematically extracted and hearing results were compared in a meta-analysis. For the drill group, a total of 978 patients were retrieved and data were obtained as follows: mean age was 50 years old; the female proportion was 62%; mean preoperative air-bone gap (ABG) of 28 dB; mean postoperative ABG of 8 dB; mean ABG improvement of 20 dB; an ABG closure rate to < 10 dB of 74%. For the laser group, a total of 553 patients were retrieved, data were obtained as follows: mean age was 47 years old; the female proportion was 63%; preoperative ABG of 26 dB; postoperative ABG of 8 dB; mean ABG improvement of 18 dB; an ABG closure rate to < 10 dB of 72%. The results from this study reveal that in regard to postoperative hearing results, surgical outcomes are comparable, and there is no statistically significant difference between the utilization of drills and lasers as a surgical instrument for the fenestration of the stapes footplate during stapedotomy surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32535861
doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-06117-1
pii: 10.1007/s00405-020-06117-1
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
9-14Références
Menger DJ, Tange RA (2003) The aetiology of otosclerosis: a review of the literature. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 28:112–120
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00675.x
Casazza GC, Thomas AJ, Dewey J, Gurgel RK, Shelton C, Meier JD (2019) Variations in stapes surgery cost within a multihospital network. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 161(5):835–841. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599819855055
doi: 10.1177/0194599819855055
pubmed: 31184268
Isaacson B, Hunter JB, Rivas A (2018) Endoscopic stapes surgery. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 51(2):415–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2017.11.011
doi: 10.1016/j.otc.2017.11.011
Parrilla C, Galli J, Fetoni AR, Rigante M, Paludetti G (2008) Erbium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser stapedotomy—a safe technique. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 138(4):507–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2007.12.033
doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2007.12.033
pubmed: 18359363
Jovanovic S, Schönfeld U, Scherer H (2004) CO2 laser stapedotomy with the ‘‘one-shot’’ technique—clinical results. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 131:750–757
doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2004.05.008
Just T, Guder E, Pau HW (2012) Effect of the stapedotomy technique on early post-operative hearing results–preliminary results. Auris Nasus Larynx 39(4):383–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anl.2011.07.009
doi: 10.1016/j.anl.2011.07.009
pubmed: 21862257
Wegner I, Kamalski DM, Tange RA et al (2014) Laser versus conventional fenestration in stapedotomy for otosclerosis: a systematic review. Laryngoscope 124(7):1687–1693. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24514
doi: 10.1002/lary.24514
pubmed: 24214900
Altamami NM, Huyghues des Etages G, Fieux M et al (2019) Is one of these two techniques: CO2 laser versus microdrill assisted stapedotomy results in better post-operative hearing outcome? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 276(7):1907–1913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05415-7
doi: 10.1007/s00405-019-05415-7
pubmed: 30949824
Pauli N, Strömbäck K, Lundman L, Dahlin-Redfors Y (2020) Surgical technique in stapedotomy hearing outcome and complications. Laryngoscope 130(3):790–796. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.28072
doi: 10.1002/lary.28072
pubmed: 31107553
Karaca S, Basut O, Demir UL, Özmen ÖA, Kasapoğlu F, Coşkun H (2016) Comparison of videonystagmography and audiological findings after stapedotomy; CO2 laser vs perforator. J Int Adv Otol 12(2):152–155. https://doi.org/10.5152/iao.2016.1575
doi: 10.5152/iao.2016.1575
pubmed: 27716600
Fang L, Lin H, Zhang TY, Tan J (2014) Laser versus non-laser stapedotomy in otosclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Auris Nasus Larynx 41(4):337–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anl.2013.12.014
doi: 10.1016/j.anl.2013.12.014
pubmed: 24572322
Parida PK, Kalaiarasi R, Gopalakrishnan S (2016) diode laser stapedotomy vs conventional stapedotomy in otosclerosis: a double-blinded randomized clinical trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 154(6):1099–1105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599816635132
doi: 10.1177/0194599816635132
pubmed: 26980905
Hamerschmidt R, Saab SS, Carvalho B, Carmo CD (2018) Short-term audiological results of diode laser in comparison with manual perforation in stapes surgery. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 22(2):119–124. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1602703
doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1602703
pubmed: 29619098