ArticleNational journal of maxillofacial surgery
External auditory canal injuries in maxillofacial trauma - Proposal of a symptom-based treatment algorithm with a report of twelve cases.
Article in National journal of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Injury to the external auditory canal (EAC) may occur following facial trauma. They manifest as otalgia, ear bleeding, otorrhea, facial palsy, or altered hearing. But literature regarding its management is sparse. The study aimed to identify the incidence and types of EAC injury in facial trauma, grade their severity, and propose a symptom-based treatment algorithm. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective case series involving patients with signs/symptoms of EAC injury following maxillofacial trauma. The EAC was evaluated by clinical examination, imaging, endoscopy, and audiometry. Clinical findings were graded into mild, moderate, and severe. Treatment was matched to clinical findings according to the proposed algorithm. The outcomes of the study were incidence and types of EAC injury in facial trauma and resolution of presenting signs/symptoms. Data were analyzed for descriptive statistics using SPSS software (v26; IBM, Armonk, NY). Results: A total of 88 patients reported with maxillofacial trauma during a 6-month period. Signs/symptoms of EAC injury were observed in 41 patients, of which 12 (11 males and 1 female) were confirmed with a diagnosis of EAC injuries. Eight patients demonstrated only cartilaginous injuries while three had bony injuries. Treatment was successful in 11 out of 12 patients, with a best point estimate of 0.86 (Z score-1.959, 95% CI). Conclusion: Clinical findings of EAC injury mandate thorough investigation to ascertain the site and severity of the injury. Symptom-based treatment of EAC injuries produces an effective resolution of signs/symptoms and improved treatment outcomes.
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.