A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Patterns of failure in heat-activated crimping prosthesis in stapedotomy. | LitMetric

Patterns of failure in heat-activated crimping prosthesis in stapedotomy.

Otol Neurotol

Pittsburgh Ear Associates, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Published: January 2011


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: To understand potential causes of failure in heat-activated crimping prosthesis in stapedotomy.

Study Design: Retrospective chart review of all primary and subsequent revision stapedotomy operations performed by the senior authors with heat-activated-crimping prosthesis between June 2003 and September 2009. Patients who had history of previous stapedotomy performed elsewhere were excluded.

Setting: Private neurotologic tertiary referral center.

Patients: The 335 primary stapedotomies reviewed included 190 with a SMart prosthesis and 145 with a manual-crimp De La Cruz prothesis. Twenty-one patients in the SMart prosthesis group underwent revision stapedotomy. Six patients in the De La Cruz prosthesis group underwent revision stapedotomy. Average length of time between initial and revision surgery for each prosthetic group was 16.5 months and 11 months, respectively.

Intervention: Primary and revision stapedotomy using heat-activated nitinol (SMart) or manual crimp-on platinum (De La Cruz) prosthesis.

Results: A total of 190 primary stapedotomies using heat-activated crimping prosthesis were performed between this period. There were 21 patients who had initial good hearing results that required revision or replacement with a different type of prosthesis. A common finding was lateral displacement of the prosthesis from the stapedotomy with detachment of the nitinol hook from the incus. This group of patients was compared with a control group that used manual-crimp prosthesis.

Conclusion: Heat-activated crimping prosthesis has been reported to enhance stapedotomy hearing outcomes on short- and long-term follow-up studies. Longitudinal analysis on its complications has not been reported. This case series demonstrated 11% rate of possible lateral displacement of the prosthesis out of the vestibule and/or incus. Reopening of the nitinol hook off the incus also was a common associated finding. Failure rates are classified. The advantages and disadvantages of this popular prosthesis are reviewed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182009d10DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

heat-activated crimping
16
crimping prosthesis
16
revision stapedotomy
16
prosthesis
12
failure heat-activated
8
stapedotomy
8
prosthesis stapedotomy
8
primary stapedotomies
8
smart prosthesis
8
prosthesis group
8

Similar Publications