Endoscopic stapedotomy: classic versus reversal technique

Abstract

Objectives To compare hearing outcome and surgical complications between endoscopic classic and reversal stapedotomies. Patients and methods A prospective single blinded randomized clinical study carried out on 60 patients with otosclerosis who were randomized into two groups; each containing 30 patients. Patients in group 1 underwent endoscopic classic stapedotomy. Patients in group 2 underwent endoscopic reversal stapedotomy. Both groups were compared as regards hearing outcome and surgical complications. Results The difference in the hearing outcome between the two groups was statistically non-significant. Post-operative closure of the air bone gap (ABG) within 10 dB was attained in 76.67% and 80% of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. The differences in the surgical complications between the two studied groups were statistically non-significant. Conclusion Endoscopic classic and reversal stapedotomies are comparable to each other as regards hearing outcome and surgical complications. The authors recommend further studies with relatively larger sample size.

Standardizing the size of pistons in both sexes and comparing the outcome of reverse stapedotomy: our experience

“…The surgical approach and techniques for treating otosclerosis have evolved and been refined over time to reduce intraoperative and post-operative complications while enhancing overall effectiveness. 4,5 There has been ongoing debate regarding the sequence of surgical steps. In early cases, the traditional method involved a classic stapedotomy, which began with the removal of the stapes superstructure, followed by perforation of the footplate, and ultimately fixing the prosthesis to the incus.…”

“…In early cases, the traditional method involved a classic stapedotomy, which began with the removal of the stapes superstructure, followed by perforation of the footplate, and ultimately fixing the prosthesis to the incus. 5,6 Dr.…”