ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare audiological and speech/language discrimination results in patients with osteo-integrated auditory devices, by comparing two different systems including different audiological indications in adult population. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive and analytic, cross-sectional, cohort, and retrospective case review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients >14âyears old, with conductive, mixed, or unilateral sensorineural hearing loss were compared. The variables studied were the following: pure tone audiometry results, air-bone gap, and the percentage of speech/language discrimination using Disyllabic Word Test. The patients were tested preoperative and 12âmonths after surgical procedure. Subsequently, a comparative analysis of the both systems was carried out. RESULTS: With both implants, pure tone audiometry results and the difference in auditory thresholds and between the air-bone gap improved significantly. Speech discrimination increased significantly after implantation too. A significant difference was observed after implantation of both devices. Patients implanted with one of the implants showed better audiological results, but no significant differences were found with the other device. So, it was shown that the type of device and the type of hearing loss have no influence on the audiological results or complications. CONCLUSION: Both implants represent a good choice for audiological rehabilitation in patients with transmissive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss, or unilateral sensorineural hearing loss with a high success and low complication rates.
Subject(s)
Hearing Aids , Hearing Loss, Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural , Speech Perception , Adolescent , Adult , Audiometry, Pure-Tone , Auditory Threshold , Bone Conduction , Cross-Sectional Studies , Hearing Loss, Conductive , Humans , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Objective: Several studies have demonstrated the possibility to obtain vestibular potentials elicited with electrical stimulation from cochlear and vestibular implants. The objective of this study is to analyze the vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs) obtained from patients implanted with cochlear and vestibulo-cochlear implant. Material and Methods: We compared two groups: in the first group, four cochlear implant (CI) recipients with present acoustic cVEMPs before CI surgery were included. In the second group, three patients with bilaterally absent cVEMPs and bilateral vestibular dysfunction were selected. The latter group received a unilateral cochleo-vestibular implant. We analyze the electrically elicited cVEMPs in all patients after stimulation with cochlear and vestibular electrode array stimulation. Results: We present the results obtained post-operatively in both groups. All patients (100%) with direct electrical vestibular stimulation via the vestibular electrode array had present cVEMPs. The P1 and N1 latencies were 11.33-13.6 ms and 18.3-21 ms, respectively. In CI patients, electrical cVEMPs were present only in one of the four subjects (25%) with cochlear implant ("cross") stimulation, and P1 and N1 latencies were 9.67 and 16.33, respectively. In these patients, the responses present shorter latencies than those observed acoustically. Conclusions: Electrically evoked cVEMPs can be present after cochlear and vestibular stimulation and suggest stimulation of vestibular elements, although clinical effect must be further studied.
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION: Nasal packing is routinely used in septal surgery to prevent postoperative bleeding. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the possibility of transeptal suture as a safe and effective way to avoid nasal packing and to improve efficiency. METHODS: This is a prospective, descriptive, inferential cost study comprising 92 patients. Two randomized groups of patients were analyzed, one with nasal packing and the other with transeptal suture. RESULTS: In the group of transeptal suture no patient experienced postoperative bleeding, and a statistically significant reduction of pain and headache was demonstrated. At the same time, we improved efficiency by saving on material costs. CONCLUSIONS: Transeptal suture is an effective and safe alternative to classic nasal packing in septal surgery. Moreover, it improves the efficiency of the intervention by saving costs.
Resumo Introdução: O tamponamento nasal é usado rotineiramente na cirurgia septal para evitar sangramentos no pós-operatório. Objetivo: Demonstrar a possibilidade de se realizar uma sutura transeptal como alternativa eficaz e segura ao tamponamento nasal, com melhora na eficiência da intervenção. Método: Este é um estudo prospectivo, descritivo e de custo inferencial, compreendendo 92 pacientes. Dois grupos aleatórios foram estudados: um com tamponamento nasal e o outro com sutura transeptal. Resultado: No grupo de sutura transeptal, nenhum paciente experimentou sangramento no pós-operatório, tendo sido estatisticamente demonstrada uma significante redução de cefaléia e dor. Ao mesmo tempo, houve melhora na eficiência da intervenção, com economia no custo de material. Conclusões: A sutura transeptal é uma alternativa eficaz e segura ao tamponamento nasal clássico. Além do mais, melhora a eficiência da intervenção, economizando no custo de material.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Young Adult , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Suture Techniques , Nasal Septum/surgery , Postoperative Care/methods , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures/economics , Tampons, Surgical , Pain Measurement , Epistaxis , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Postoperative Hemorrhage/prevention & controlABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Nasal packing is routinely used in septal surgery to prevent postoperative bleeding. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the possibility of transeptal suture as a safe and effective way to avoid nasal packing and to improve efficiency. METHODS: This is a prospective, descriptive, inferential cost study comprising 92 patients. Two randomized groups of patients were analyzed, one with nasal packing and the other with transeptal suture. RESULTS: In the group of transeptal suture no patient experienced postoperative bleeding, and a statistically significant reduction of pain and headache was demonstrated. At the same time, we improved efficiency by saving on material costs. CONCLUSIONS: Transeptal suture is an effective and safe alternative to classic nasal packing in septal surgery. Moreover, it improves the efficiency of the intervention by saving costs.
