Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-h8lrw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-14T20:51:53.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glue under pressure: A bad prognostic sign for recurrence of otitis media with effusion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

M. A. Salam  and
C. Wengraf
M. A. Salam*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull.
C. Wengraf
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull.
*
18 Arundel Close, Warwick, WarwickshireCV34 5HZ.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One hundred and thirteen children with bilateral otitis media with effusion (OME) underwent myringotomy and insertion of Shah grommets. They were classified into three groups according to the presence or absence of ‘glue under pressure’ unilaterally or bilaterally. The follow up period ranging between 18 and 32 months determined the comparative rate of recurrence of OME and the number of grommet reinsertions. This study shows a significantly higher incidence of recurrent OME, requiring grommet reinsertion, in ears with glue under pressure (60 per cent) compared to those with glue not under pressure (7.4 per cent). Thus it was possible to identify a subset of children with OME who have a poorer prognosis for recurrence and who should be treated with long-stay grommets in the first instance.

Keywords

Otitis media with effusion

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 106 , Issue 11 , November 1992 , pp. 974 - 976
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1992

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

Armstrong, B. W. (1954) A new treatment for chronic secretory otitis media. Archives of Otolaryngology, 59, 653–654.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barfoed, A., Rosborg, J. (1980) Secretory otitis media: Long term observation after treatment with grommets. Archives of Otolaryngology, 106, 553–556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bluestone, C. D. (1982) Otitis media in children: To treat or not to treat? New England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1399–1404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibb, A. G., Mackenzie, I. J. (1985) The extrusion rate of grommets. Archives of Otolaryngology, 93, 695–699.Google ScholarPubMed
Hibbert, J., Stell, P. M. (1982) The role of enlarged adenoids in aetiology of secretory otitis media. Clinical Otolaryngology, 7, 253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilby, D., Richards, S. H., Hart, G. (1972) Grommets and glue ears: Two year results. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 86, 881–888.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lesser, T. H., Clayton, M. I., Skinner, D. (1986) Efficacy of medical treatment as an adjuvent to surgery in the treatment of secretory otitis media. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 100, 1347–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maw, A. R., Parker, A. J. (1989) Treatment of glue ear in relation to radiographic palatal airway size: A predictor for outcome following adenoidectomy. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 103, 66–69.Google Scholar
Ramsden, R. T.Moffat, D. A., Gibson, W. P., Jay, M. M. (1977) S-carboxymethylcysteine in the treatment of glue ear, a doubleblind trial. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 91, 847–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, D. W., Lesser, T. H., Richards, S. H. (1988) A 15 year follow-up of a controlled trial of the use of grommets in glue ear. Clinical Otolaryngology, 13, 341–346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slack, R. W., Maw, R. A., Capper, J. W., Kelly, S. (1984). Prospective study of tympanosclerosis developing after grommet insertion. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 98, 771–774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tos, M., Poulsen, G. (1976) Secretory otitis media: Late results of treatment with grommets. Archives of Otolaryngology, 102, 672–675.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed