ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2021
Surgical treatments of superior semicircular canal dehiscence: A single-centre experience in 63 cases.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Outcomes in Superior Canal Dehiscence Surgery Using Either Transmastoid or Middle Fossa Surgical Approaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialePooled it
- Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Is Associated with Recurrent CSF Leak and Reoperation for Spontaneous Temporal Encephalocele.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2024Article
- Pulsatile Tinnitus: Differential Diagnosis and Approach to Management.Current pain and headache reports · 2024Review
- Predictors of non-primary auditory and vestibular symptom persistence following surgical repair of superior canal dehiscence syndrome.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Hearing Results after Transmastoid Superior Semicircular Canal Plugging for Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence: A Meta-Analysis.Audiology research · 2023Review
- Surgical treatments of superior semicircular canal dehiscence: A single-centre experience in 63 cases.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDifferent procedures have been described to treat superior canal dehiscence. The present study aims to describe the results obtained with middle fossa approach, transmastoid approach, and round window reinforcement in a large series of patients. METHODS AND
designIn this single-center retrospective study, we report the results of the procedures performed between 2006 and 2019 using the three main surgical approaches, middle fossa approach (MFA), transmastoid approach (TMA), and round window reinforcement (RWR). The outcome on cardinal cochlear and vestibular symptoms, audiometric results, and changes in cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMPs) were analyzed. The patients were also interviewed 12 months to 13 years post-treatment to establish their overall satisfaction following surgery.
resultsSixty-three patients were divided into three groups: 42 MFA; 12 RWR; 9 TMA. Postsurgical control rates exceeded 80% for the majority of symptoms in the MFA and TMA groups, and ranged from 11.1% to 83.3% for the RWR group. Over 90% of MFA or TMA patients and 60% of the RWR cohort were satisfied overall with their treatment. Hearing thresholds were intact following surgery in the MFA and TMA groups. There was one case of profound postoperative deafness in the RWR group.
conclusionMFA and TMA are both safe and effective techniques in the treatment of disabling SSCD. Since MFA is the more invasive technique, we suggest that TMA should be proposed as first-line treatment, temporal bone anatomy permitting. RWR outcomes are more variable in term of symptomatic control, and this option could be offered to patients at risk under general anesthesia. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4 evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.