The effects of a canalplasty and a canal wall reconstruction on perceived sound quality: preliminary results

Spronsen, Erik van; Brienesse, Patrick; Ebbens, Fenna A.; Dreschler, Wouter A.

doi:10.1007/s00405-016-3910-z

Cited by 5 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gantz et al postulated that these marginal hearing outcomes were due to ongoing Eustachian tube dysfunction and tympanosclerosis. We agree with this assessment and would add that CWR technique may also alter the acoustic properties of the ear and/or the vibratory capacity of the ossicular chain …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Canal reconstruction mastoidectomy: Outcomes comparison following primary versus secondary surgery

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis: Compare surgical and audiometric outcomes following canal wall reconstruction (CWR) tympanomastoidectomy used as a primary versus secondary approach for treating cholesteatoma.Study Design: Retrospective. Methods: Patients treated for primary/secondary cholesteatoma from 2006 to 2017 via CWR were included if they had preoperative/postoperative audiograms, detailed operative note(s), and >12 months' follow-up. Patients were stratified by previous surgical history into two groups: primary CWR group (PG) and secondary CWR group (SG). Surgical outcomes measured were prevalence of recidivistic cholesteatoma, canal cholesteatoma, revision rate, and canal wall down (CWD) conversion rates. Secondary outcomes were prevalence of infection, external canal adhesions/stenoses, and retractions. Audiometric outcomes included change in pure-tone average and air-bone gap.Results: We stratified 45 patients/ears into the PG and 26 into the SG. The groups did not significantly differ in age, sex, or smoking status. Overall, median follow-up was 35 months. SG patients had higher rates of cholesteatoma detected at staged surgery than did PG patients (P = .04). However, these patients exhibited lower rates of open revision surgery (4% vs.13%) and a significant improvement in air-bone gap (P = .004). Three PG patients (7%) required conversion to CWD versus zero SG patients. Secondary outcomes were similar. Patients who underwent delayed staging >12 months from CWR had increased rates of recidivism and canal adhesion/stenosis.Conclusions: CWR was effective for treating cholesteatoma as both a primary and secondary surgical approach. SG patients experienced higher rates of recidivism and secondary canal cholesteatoma. PG patients had higher rates of revision surgery. Staging of ears undergoing CWR is important regardless of prior surgical history.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Canal reconstruction mastoidectomy: Outcomes comparison following primary versus secondary surgery

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even less extensive surgical alterations of the OEAC, such as an osseous canalplasty, lead to changes in ear canal acoustics [9]. These observations seem to indicate that volume changes of the ear canal lead to alterations in ear canal acoustics [8,9]. In previous studies, we have demonstrated that these surgical alterations of the OEAC provoke an altered perception of the sound [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Due to its anatomical dimensions the external auditory ear canal acts as a filter to reduce low frequencies and enhance mid to high frequencies [3]. Surgical modification of the osseous external auditory canal (OEAC) changes the acoustic properties of the external ear canal [4][5][6][7][8][9]. For example, in case of a cavity condition, the acoustic properties shift towards an amplification of the soundwaves of low to mid frequencies and an reduction in soundwaves of high frequencies [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in case of a cavity condition, the acoustic properties shift towards an amplification of the soundwaves of low to mid frequencies and an reduction in soundwaves of high frequencies [8]. In case of revision, radical cavity surgery with reconstruction of the posterior wall of the cavity near-normal acoustic characteristics were measured [9]. Even less extensive surgical alterations of the OEAC, such as an osseous canalplasty, lead to changes in ear canal acoustics [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In case of revision, radical cavity surgery with reconstruction of the posterior wall of the cavity near-normal acoustic characteristics were measured [9]. Even less extensive surgical alterations of the OEAC, such as an osseous canalplasty, lead to changes in ear canal acoustics [9]. These observations seem to indicate that volume changes of the ear canal lead to alterations in ear canal acoustics [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Can we predict the altered subjective quality assessment of sound after ear canal surgery?

Zwemstra

Brienesse

Ebbens

et al. 2020

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To correlate the subjective quality assessment of ear canal acoustics of the participants to the objective measurement of the ear canal acoustics. The objective ear canal acoustics is the frequency-dependent modulation of soundwaves through the ear canal. Our second objective is to design a model to predict the subjective quality of sound based on the altered objective ear canal acoustics. Methods To determine the frequency-dependent modulation of the soundwaves the real-ear unaided gain (REUG) of the ear canal is measured. 40 participants with normal hearing were presented six simulated sound fragments representing the acoustic properties of six different ear canals (REUG). These six sound fragments were built based on the difference between these six REUGs and the average REUG of a normal adult ear canal. Subjective sound quality was evaluated using a VAS score and a paired comparison score. Results We found a strong correlation between the objective ear canal acoustics and the subjective assessment of the quality of sound (Spearman's rho-0.89). Our linear mixed VAS model for individual participants has an intercept of 95.6 and a slope of − 4.2 (p < 0.001). The paired comparison analysis endorsed our findings that an increased difference in REUG is predictive for a decreased quality assessment of ear canal acoustics. Conclusion There is a strong correlation between the subjective evaluation of ear canal acoustics and the objective quality assessment of ear canal acoustics. Our models show that an increased difference in REUG predicts a decreased quality of ear canal acoustics.

show abstract

Habituation of changed acoustics properties after canal wall down mastoidectomy

Zwemstra

Brienesse

Wolf

et al. 2022

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Our objective is to evaluate the effect of habituation on the altered ear canal acoustics after canal wall down mastoidectomy. Methods A total of 11 participants with single sided dry cavities and normal contralateral ear canals with normal hearing thresholds were included in the study. Filtered sound fragments were created that simulate the different acoustic properties based on the participants Real Ear to Coupler Difference (RECD) of the cavity ear and the contralateral normal ear canal. These filtered sound fragments are presented to the cavity ear canal and the contralateral normal ear canal using inserts earphones. Participants performed a subjective quality assessment of the sound fragments using paired comparison with a seven-point scale (− 3 till + 3). Results Mean assessment of sound quality revealed the following results; naturalness of sounds of the cavity ear canal is 0.29 (± 1.41; ns) in favour of the filtered sound fragment of the normal ear canal. Mean assessment of sharpness of sounds in the cavity ear canal is 1.55 (± 1.21, p = 0.55) in favour of the filtered sound fragment of the normal ear canal. Overall preference in the cavity ear canal was in favour of the normal ear canal acoustics 0.72 (SD ± 1.54 p = 0.224). Conclusions Patients with cavity ear canals seem to habituate to their altered ear canal acoustics. Transforming the ear canal acoustics of the cavity ear to normal ear canal acoustics seem to sharpen the incoming sounds. Overall assessment of quality of sound of the normal ear canal acoustics is better than the cavity acoustics.

show abstract

The effects of a canalplasty and a canal wall reconstruction on perceived sound quality: preliminary results

Cited by 5 publications

References 12 publications

Canal reconstruction mastoidectomy: Outcomes comparison following primary versus secondary surgery

Canal reconstruction mastoidectomy: Outcomes comparison following primary versus secondary surgery

Can we predict the altered subjective quality assessment of sound after ear canal surgery?

Habituation of changed acoustics properties after canal wall down mastoidectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About