Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38219247›Full record

Observational studyEuropean 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 Surgery2024

Conventional vs. diode laser stapedotomy: audiological outcomes and clinical safety.

Leonardo Elías Ordóñez Ordóñez, Daniela Cerón Perdomo, Claudia Paola González Saboya, Felipe Osorio Mejía, Jorge Medina-Parra, Esther Sofía Angulo Martínez

Abstract readObservational StudyComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study 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, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Authors' response to the letter to the editor: "Conventional versus diode laser stapedotomy: audiological outcomes and clinical safety".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 · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Leonardo Elías Ordóñez OrdóñezDepartment of Otolaryngology, Clínica Universitaria Colombia, Clínica Colsanitas SA, Keralty, Calle 23 #66-46, Bogotá, Colombia. otoleor@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1410-5706
Daniela Cerón PerdomoDepartment of Otolaryngology, Facultad de Medicina, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas (Unisanitas), Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4871-8807
Claudia Paola González SaboyaDepartment of Otolaryngology, Facultad de Medicina, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas (Unisanitas), Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Felipe Osorio MejíaDepartment of Otolaryngology, Facultad de Medicina, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas (Unisanitas), Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Jorge Medina-ParraFacultad de Medicina, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas (Unisanitas), Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Esther Sofía Angulo MartínezAnaboleas Research Team, Endorsed by Clinica Universitaria Colombia and Fundación Universitaria Sanitas (Unisanitas). Recognized by Colciencias (2021) Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation of Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.

Funding

Unisanitas CEIFUS 687-20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the hearing results and clinical safety of patients undergoing stapes surgery with conventional technique and diode laser.

methodsRetrospective observational study, which included patients treated with primary stapes surgery performed between January 2009 and January 2020. Three audiometric measurements (PTA, GAP and SDS) were evaluated as main results, evaluated by analysis of covariance (controlling the preoperative value). Intraoperative and postoperative complications were also analyzed. Outcomes were measured 6 months (± 1 month) after surgery.

results153 cases were included, 97 operated with conventional technique and 56 with laser technique. Postoperative GAP ≤ 10 dB was obtained in 85.6% of the total sample, 82.5% in the conventional technique and 91.1% in the laser technique. Analysis of covariance showed no significant differences in the three surgery outcomes between the two groups (PTA, p = 0.277; GAP, p = 0.509 and SDS, p = 0.530). Regarding surgical complications, sensorineural damage was higher in the conventional technique group (p = 0.05). On the other hand, there were four cases of facial paresis, all in the laser group, three of them with the 980 nm laser.

conclusionsStapedotomy offered a high percentage of hearing success in the two groups studied. There were no significant differences in audiometric result, but there was a differential presentation of complications, being more frequent sensorineural hearing loss in the conventional technique group and facial paresis in the laser group.

Indexed as

Lasers, SemiconductorOtosclerosisPostoperative ComplicationsStapes SurgeryAdultAgedAudiometryFemaleHumansLaser TherapyMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeHearing lossLaserOtosclerosisStapedectomyStapedotomySurgery outcomes

Identifiers

PMID38219247
PMCPMC11211175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.