Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Otol Neurotol ; 29(8): 1115-9, 2008 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18833013

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and type of complications, as well as patient satisfaction, associated with the Baha system. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: The Silverstein Institute, Sarasota, Florida, and the Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York. PATIENTS: Patients with conductive/mixed hearing loss and single-sided deafness implanted with the Baha system between June 1998 and December 2007. INTERVENTION: Implantation with the Baha system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence and type of complications associated with Baha implantation and patient satisfaction as measured by a questionnaire administered on site or by telephone. RESULTS: : In our series of 218 patients (223 ears), there were no major complications. Of these patients, 4.5% required revision surgery for soft tissue complications and 1.3% needed revision for failure of osseointegration. Eight percent (8%) required local care and resolved within 2 to 3 weeks of treatment. Five percent (5%) required in office procedures. One hundred six (106) patients satisfactorily completed the survey questionnaire. Ninety-two percent (92%) reported using the device regularly and 77% were happy with the device. On average, patients reported using the device 10.1 h/d, 5.6 d/wk. CONCLUSION: The Baha system is safe and effective in the rehabilitation of patients with conductive or mixed hearing losses and with single-sided deafness. The high success rate, patient satisfaction rate, and predictable auditory outcome place the Baha among the leading choices for auditory rehabilitation.


Subject(s)
Hearing Aids , Patient Satisfaction , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Temporal Bone/surgery , Deafness/surgery , Hearing Aids/adverse effects , Hearing Loss/etiology , Hearing Loss/surgery , Hearing Loss, Conductive/etiology , Hearing Loss, Conductive/surgery , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/etiology , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/surgery , Humans , Otosclerosis/complications , Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Reoperation , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome
2.
Laryngoscope ; 116(1): 115-20, 2006 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16481822

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The use of bisphosphonates is well established for the treatment of patients with metastatic bone disease, osteoporosis, and Paget's disease. Osteonecrosis of the mandible or maxilla associated with the use of bisphosphonates is a newly described entity never before discussed in the otolaryngology literature. In this paper, we review a series of patients diagnosed with osteonecrosis, all treated with new generation bisphosphonates. Our objective is to inform and educate others, particularly otolaryngologists/head and neck surgeons, about this drug induced entity, a condition that should be recognized early to avoid potential devastating consequences. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of a series of patients from a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Pathology reports of specimens submitted from either the mandible or maxilla were reviewed from the previous 12 months. Any patient diagnosed with osteonecrosis without evidence of metastatic disease at that site was included; those with a previous history of radiation therapy were excluded. Each patient's medical history and profile were reviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were identified with osteonecrosis of the mandible or maxilla. All of these were associated with the use of new generation bisphosphonates: zolendronate (Zometa, Novartis), pamidronate (Aredia, Novartis), and alendronate (Fosamax, Merck). Eighteen patients with known bone metastases had been treated with the intravenous form, whereas five patients with either osteoporosis or Paget's disease were using oral therapy. Patients typically presented with a nonhealing lesion, often times the result of previous dental intervention. Although the majority of these patients were treated with conservative surgical debridement, we present a case requiring a near total maxillectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Drug induced osteonecrosis of the mandible or maxilla has been recently recognized as a sequelae of treatment with the new generation of bisphosphonates. Most patients can be treated with conservative surgical debridement and cessation of bisphosphonate therapy, whereas a few may require radical surgical intervention. Other recommendations include regimented prophylactic care with an assessment of dental status before the administration of bisphosphonates, avoidance of dental procedures, and close monitoring of oral hygiene.


Subject(s)
Bone Neoplasms/drug therapy , Diphosphonates/adverse effects , Osteonecrosis/chemically induced , Osteonecrosis/surgery , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Biopsy, Needle , Bone Neoplasms/diagnosis , Bone Neoplasms/secondary , Debridement/methods , Diphosphonates/therapeutic use , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Infusions, Intravenous , Mandible/pathology , Mandible/surgery , Maxilla/pathology , Maxilla/surgery , Middle Aged , Oral Surgical Procedures/methods , Osteonecrosis/pathology , Osteoporosis/diagnosis , Risk Assessment , Severity of Illness Index , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...