2012
DOI: 10.2478/s11536-011-0140-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanical treatment and autoclaving of middle ear ossicles from cholesteatomatous ears

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(3 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(40 reference statements)
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We grouped the destruction of the malleus and incus into two grades. Our grading system is consistent with malleus and incus erosion classification (11,12). Ossicle destruction grade I is mild erosion and ossicle is available for autograft ossiculoplasty.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 54%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…We grouped the destruction of the malleus and incus into two grades. Our grading system is consistent with malleus and incus erosion classification (11,12). Ossicle destruction grade I is mild erosion and ossicle is available for autograft ossiculoplasty.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 54%
“…Vartiainen and Karjalainen (13) reported a low cholesteatoma recurrence rate of only 4%. The risk of residual disease is lowered by drilling of all ossicular surfaces under microscopic control and increased in cases of badly eroded ossicles (2,6,11,12). Because badly eroded ossicles are deformed and flimsy, mechanical cleaning is technically more difficult and limited in efficacy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation