Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-8mwbx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-01T08:05:42.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Revision stapes surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

Thomas Somers ,
Paul Govaerts ,
Sebastien Janssens de Varebeke  and
Erwin Offeciers
Thomas Somers*
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, University of Antwerp, Oosterveldlaan 24, B-2610 Wilrijk (Antwerp), Belgium.
Paul Govaerts
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, University of Antwerp, Oosterveldlaan 24, B-2610 Wilrijk (Antwerp), Belgium.
Sebastien Janssens de Varebeke
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, University of Antwerp, Oosterveldlaan 24, B-2610 Wilrijk (Antwerp), Belgium.
Erwin Offeciers
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, University of Antwerp, Oosterveldlaan 24, B-2610 Wilrijk (Antwerp), Belgium.
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Thomas Somers, University Department of Otolaryngology, and Head and Neck Surgery, Sint-Augustinus Hospital, Oosterveldlaan 24, B-2610 Wilrijk (Antwerp), Belgium. Fax: 32-3-443 36 11
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reports on the analysis of 332 otosclerosis revision operations. The results have been evaluated with reference to the type of the procedure at primary surgery, the alleged cause of failure and the applied technical solution.

The need for revision surgery was found higher after primary totalstapedectomy (3.4 per cent) than after partial stapedectomy (2.2 per cent) or stapedotomy (two per cent). The reason for revision varied according to the originally applied technique eg a migrated piston, a too short piston and a lateralized graft are almost exclusively foundafter total stapedectomies.

The median hearing gain after revision of stapedotomy and partial stapedectomy was higher (20 dB and 18 dB respectively) than that after revision surgery for total stapedectomy (12 dB), but significantly lower than hearing gain after primary surgery (32 dB).

Revisions yielded better results in the case of primary interventions with the use of a piston or piston- wire than in the case of primary interventions with a wire-type prosthesis. The risk for sensorineural loss (one per cent) was not higher than in primary surgery.

Keywords

Otoscierosis, Stapes surgeryReoperation

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 111 , Issue 3 , March 1997 , pp. 233 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bhardwaj, B. K., Kacker, S. K. (1988) Revision stapes surgery. Journal of Laryngology and Otology 102: 20–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crabtree, J., Britton, B., Powers, W. (1980) An evaluation of revision stapes surgery. Laryngoscope 90: 224–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derlacki, E. (1985) Revision stapes surgery: problems with some solutions. Laryngoscope 95: 1047–1053.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farrior, J., Sutherland, A. (1991) Revision stapes surgery. Laryngoscope 101: 115–1161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisch, U. (1982) Stapedotomy versus stapedectomy. American Journal of Otology 2: 112–117.Google Scholar
Fisch, U. (1991) Tympanoplasty today (Editorial). Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Belgica 45: 3.Google Scholar
Glasscock, M., McKennan, K., Levine, S. (1987) Revision stapedectomy surgery. Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery 96: 141–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lesinski, S., Stein, J. (1989) Stapedectomy revision with the CO2 laser. Laryngoscope 99: 13–19.Google ScholarPubMed
Lippy, W., Schuring, A. (1983) Solvingossicular problems in stapedectomy. Laryngoscope 93: 1147–1153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lippy, W., Schuring, A., Ziv, M. (1980) Stapedectomy revision. American Journal of Otology 2: 15–21.Google Scholar
Palva, T., Ramsay, H. (1990) Revision surgery for otosclerosis. Acta Otolaryngologica (Stockh) 110: 416–420.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearman, K., Dawes, J. (1982) Post-stapedectomy conductive deafness and results of revision surgery. Journal of Laryngology and Otology 96: 405–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheehy, J., Nelson, R. (1981) Revisionstapedectomy: a review of 258 cases. Laryngoscope 91: 43–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somers, Th., Govaerts, P., Marquet, Th., Offeciers, F. E. (1994) Statistical analysis of otosclerosis surgery performed by J. Marquet. Annals of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 103: 12. 945–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar