1959
DOI: 10.1001/archotol.1959.00730040031005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Primary Diphtheritic Otitis Media: Review of the Literature and Report of a Case

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1968
1968
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(1 reference statement)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, this is found in only 23% of reported cases as per the review by Downes et al (1959) [18]. Hence bacteriological confirmation is important.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, this is found in only 23% of reported cases as per the review by Downes et al (1959) [18]. Hence bacteriological confirmation is important.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The three varieties of diphtheritic otitis media that have been reported are, i) primary diphtheritic otitis media, where middle ear is the main site of infection with isolation of organisms from ear discharge and not from the nasopharynx; ii) secondary diphtheritic otitis media where ear is involved as a complication of preexisting nasopharyngeal diphtheria and obvious positive cultures obtained from the ear and nasopharynx; and iii) superimposed infection by C. diphtheriae upon an existing otitis media due to the usual respiratory pathogens like streptococci, pneumococci or Haemophilus infleuenzae [16]. Primary diphtheritic otitis media is rare and has been reported in few old studies [16][17][18][19]. In the case presented here, the organism was isolated in addition to organisms like Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae which are the potential pathogens associated with CSOM.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%