ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2023
Are there differences in revision stapes surgery outcomes between university and county clinics? A study from the quality register for otosclerosis surgery in Sweden.
Article in 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disability, Quality of Life and Hearing Function in Patients With Untreated Otosclerosis.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Validation of the Swedish Quality Register for Ear Surgery - SwedEar.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the study was to investigate hearing outcomes in stapes revision surgery with regard to the type of clinic (university clinic or county clinic). Furthermore, the aim was to investigate the risk of complications with a focus on tinnitus, hearing deterioration, and taste disturbance 1 year after surgery.
methodsThe study is based on data from the Swedish Quality Register for Otosclerosis Surgery (SQOS). Two study protocols were completed by the surgeon, and a questionnaire was distributed to the patients 1 year after surgery. A total of 156 revisions were available for analysis with both preoperative and postoperative audiometry data.
resultsSeventy-five percent of the patients reported better to much better hearing 1 year after revision surgery. An air bone gap ≤ 20 dB postoperatively was seen in 77% of the patients. Four percent had hearing deterioration ≥ 20 dB PTA
conclusionsRevision surgery in otosclerosis is a challenge for otologists, but no differences in hearing outcomes between university and county clinics were found in this nationwide study. The risk of hearing deterioration and deafness is higher than in primary stapes surgery, and revision surgery should be recommended primarily in cases with a large air-bone gap and moderate to severe preoperative hearing loss.
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.