ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
Auditory outcomes and predictors following ossiculoplasty in cholesteatoma surgery: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Middle ear cholesteatoma causes bone/ossicular erosion. This study aimed to analyze auditory outcomes after ossiculoplasty in cholesteatoma surgery and to identify predictors of hearing outcomes related to middle ear or surgery. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent ossiculoplasty during cholesteatoma surgery (2019-2024). Preoperative, short-term (2-month), and midterm (8-month) postoperative audiograms were analyzed. Potential pre-/postoperative parameters influencing hearing were sought. Results: Eighty-eight cases were included (20 pediatric, 68 adult). There were 56 primary surgeries, and 28 patients had preoperative cholesteatoma complications. In case of present stapes, a stapes-cartilage augmentation was mostly performed, followed by a partial ossicular replacement prosthesis. In case of absent stapes, a total ossicular replacement prosthesis was used. There were 10 postoperative complications (1 prosthesis extrusion) and 16 residual cholesteatomas (1-3 years). Short-term mean postoperative gain in bone conduction (ΔBC) was 0.3 dB, while midterm ΔBC was 1.4 dB. Short-term mean postoperative gain in air conduction (ΔAC) was 3.4 dB, while midterm ΔAC was 4.5 dB. Short-term mean postoperative gain in air-bone gap (ΔABG) was 3.4 dB, while midterm ΔABG was 3.7 dB. Preoperatively, younger age favorably influenced AC and BC, and the presence of stapes favorably influenced ABG. Postoperatively, regarding midterm ΔABG, the absence of posterior tympanotomy was a predictor of good hearing outcome. Considering the midterm postoperative ABG alone, the absence of mastoidectomy was a favorable predictive factor. Regarding midterm ΔAC, primary surgery was a predictor of a good hearing outcome. Considering postoperative AC alone, there were three favorable predictive factors, namely, younger age, primary surgery, and absence of mastoidectomy. There was no predictive factor for midterm ΔBC. The malleus handle had no effect on auditory results. Discussion: Postoperative auditory results of our study are fair, given the preoperative aggressiveness/extension of cholesteatoma, but were comparable to a few other studies, as were the rates of postoperative complications and residual disease. Younger age and presence of stapes were predictive of better preoperative hearing. Postoperatively, younger age, absence of mastoidectomy, absence of posterior tympanotomy, and primary surgery were predictors of good hearing outcome. Results in the literature are highly variable, sometimes contradictory. This stems from the diversity of disease extension, surgical techniques, and materials used in ossiculoplasty.
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.