Endoscopic vs. microscopic stapes surgery: An anatomical feasibility study.
chorda tympani
endoscopic approach
minimally invasive
otosclerosis
stapes surgery
Journal
Frontiers in surgery
ISSN: 2296-875X
Titre abrégé: Front Surg
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101645127
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
26
09
2022
accepted:
24
10
2022
entrez:
12
12
2022
pubmed:
13
12
2022
medline:
13
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To investigate the feasibility of the endoscopic approach vs. microscopic approach during stapes surgery, focusing on the visualization of the important anatomical structures of the middle ear, the volume of the resected scutum and chorda tympani (CT) injury. Fresh frozen human cadaveric heads underwent two stapes surgeries using an operating microscope on one ear and an endoscope on the other ear. The surgeon documented the visualization of critical landmarks, as well as exposure and injury of the CT. The volume of resected scutum was evaluated using cone beam computed tomography scanning and three-dimensional imaging. We performed endoscopic stapes surgery in 10 ears and microscopic stapes surgery in 11 ears. A stapes prosthesis was placed in all ears. The volume of bony scutum resection was significantly lower in the endoscopic group (median = 2.20 mm This study showed that the endoscopic stapes surgery procedure is feasible and might be less invasive than microscopic stapes surgery. Future clinical prospective and functional studies will be needed to support our findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36504579
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1054342
pmc: PMC9727136
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1054342Informations de copyright
© 2022 Blijleven, Willemsen, Bleys, Stokroos, Wegner and Thomeer.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2021 Nov;165(5):626-635
pubmed: 33528314
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016 Jul;273(7):1723-9
pubmed: 26253427
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2018 Aug;29(8):1187-1193
pubmed: 30056936
J Laryngol Otol. 2020 May;134(5):398-403
pubmed: 32308176
Otol Neurotol. 2020 Jul;41(6):e712-e719
pubmed: 32574480
J Laryngol Otol. 2021 May;135(5):410-414
pubmed: 33883045
Am J Otolaryngol. 2021 Nov-Dec;42(6):103111
pubmed: 34273709
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Sep;272(9):2167-74
pubmed: 24902803
Otol Neurotol. 2021 Dec 1;42(10):1460-1466
pubmed: 34726874
Otol Neurotol. 2021 Oct 1;42(9):1291-1299
pubmed: 34267096
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2021 Feb;54(1):147-162
pubmed: 33153730
Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2018 Apr;51(2):415-428
pubmed: 29395112
J Craniofac Surg. 2015 Jul;26(5):1704-8
pubmed: 26167986
Otol Neurotol. 2016 Oct;37(9):1350-7
pubmed: 27579838
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018 Dec;275(12):2905-2913
pubmed: 30327907
Auris Nasus Larynx. 2016 Oct;43(5):501-6
pubmed: 26806025
Laryngoscope. 2006 Jan;116(1):67-71
pubmed: 16481812
Front Surg. 2021 May 14;8:659688
pubmed: 34055869
Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2011 Nov-Dec;77(6):721-7
pubmed: 22183278
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2016 Nov;90:113-118
pubmed: 27729115
Auris Nasus Larynx. 2017 Jun;44(3):253-257
pubmed: 27461175
Laryngoscope. 2021 Apr;131(4):885-891
pubmed: 33124036
Laryngoscope. 2014 Jan;124(1):266-71
pubmed: 23670854
J Int Adv Otol. 2017 Apr;13(1):14-20
pubmed: 28555595