Stapes surgery leads to significant improvement in quality of life, independently from the surgical method: evaluation of stapes surgery using different prostheses and different quality of life measurements
- 86 Downloads
To compare quality-of-life (QoL) measurements with audiological results after stapes surgery with two different prostheses.
This is a retrospective longitudinal study. All patients required stapes surgery for otosclerosis and ossicular chain reconstruction with either a titanium band prothesis (TBP) or receiving a nitinol head prosthesis (NHP). Intervention was between January 2011 and March 2017 patients received stapes-surgery with either TBP (n = 95) or NHP (n = 50). Audiological measurements at three different time points (preoperatively, early follow up < 3 months, late follow-up > 3 months) were compared and two different QoL-inventories, the Glasgow-Benefit-Inventory (GBI) and the Stapes-Plasty-Outcome-Test-25 (SPOT-25) were investigated postoperatively. The main outcome measures were Pure tone average (PTA) at 0.5, 1, 2, 3 kHz at early and late follow up after stapes surgery were compared and correlated with the subjective benefit on the QoL inventories. The perforation method and the type of surgery were analyzed as potentially influencing factors.
All patients showed a significantly reduced air bone gap (ABG 0.5, 1, 2, 3) at the two follow-up visits (visit 2: mean: 13.6 dB, SD 7.7; visit 3: mean: 12.7 dB SD 8.1) compared to preoperative measurements (mean: 28.9 dB, SD 9.9) and subjectively benefitted from stapes surgery (mean GBI score: 21.55; SD 20.60, mean SPOT-25 score: 28.03; SD 18.53). The outcome of the two questionnaires correlated with each other. Neither the hearing-outcome nor the subjective benefit was significantly influenced by the prosthesis, the perforation method or the type of anesthesia.
Both prostheses were safe and led to comparable hearing results as well as to subjective benefits in the Health-related-Quality-of-Life (HrQoL). A combination of the two questionnaires is recommendable for postoperative quality control.
KeywordsStapedotomy Stapes surgery GBI SPOT-25
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
- 5.Huber AM, Veraguth D, Schmid S, Roth T, Eiber A (2008) Tight stapes prosthesis fixation leads to better functional results in otosclerosis surgery. Otol Neurotol Off Publ Am Otol Soc Am Neurotol Soc Eur Acad Otol Neurotol. 29(7):893–899. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e318184f4f0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Causse JB, Causse JR (1982) Minimizing cochlear loss during and after stapedectomy. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 15(4):813–835. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7162820. Accessed June 2 2019.
- 8.Knox GW, Reitan H (2005) Shape-memory stapes prosthesis for otosclerosis surgery. Laryngoscope. 115(8):1340–1346. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlg.0000172274.73365.11 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Arlinger S (2003) Negative consequences of uncorrected hearing loss—a review. Int J Audiol. 42(Suppl 2):2S17–2S20Google Scholar
- 15.Bächinger D, Röösli C, Ditzen B, Huber AM (2016) Development and validation of the Zurich chronic middle ear inventory (ZCMEI-21): an electronic questionnaire for assessing quality of life in patients with chronic otitis media. Eur Arch Oto Rhino Laryngol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-016-3915-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.(1995) Committee on hearing and equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Neck Surg. 113(3):186–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(95)70103-6
- 27.Laske RD, Roosli C, Chatzimichalis MV, Sim JH, Huber AM (2011) The influence of prosthesis diameter in stapes surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature. Otol Neurotol Off Publ Am Otol Soc Am Neurotol Soc Eur Acad Otol Neurotol. 32(4):520–528. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e318216795b CrossRefGoogle Scholar