OBJECTIVE: To review surgical and audiological outcomes of COM patients that underwent CI.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective review of patients above 18 years old.
RESULTS: Ten patients with complete data were included. Patients were aged 24-69 years old. Tympanoplasty and mastoidectomy were performed before CI. Imaging was performed to rule out ossifications. Eight patients underwent a standard canal wall up with either cochleostomy or round window approach. One patient had additional canalplasty and tympanoplasty and another one had blind sac procedure respectively. Analysis of the hearing aided level with CI and hearing aid showed significant benefit provided by the CI (Z = 2.803, p = .005).
DISCUSSION: Creating a dry and safe ear is important prior to CI. Definite hearing improvement is seen in all our cases that helped them to become independent again in their daily life. Hearing aid usage pre-CI might not be important as the hearing aids may continue to cause discharging ears and the benefits of hearing aids in severe to profound hearing loss are very minimal.
CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implant is safe and effective in COM patients.
METHODS: A prospective randomized comparative trial was conducted among patients with bilateral nasal blockage secondary to inferior turbinates hypertrophy. Patients were randomly assigned to MAT or CAT. An extraturbinal medial flap turbinoplasty was performed for both techniques. Symptom assessment was based on the visual analogue score for nasal obstruction, sneezing, rhinorrhea, headache and hyposmia. Turbinate size, edema and secretions were assessed by nasoendoscopic examination. The assessments were done preoperatively, at 1st postoperative week, 2nd and 3rd postoperative months. Postoperative morbidity like pain, bleeding, crusting and synechiae were documented. The clinical outcomes of both techniques were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS: A total of 33 participants were recruited, 17 patients randomized for MAT and 16 patients for CAT. Nasal obstruction, discharge, sneezing, headache and hyposmia significantly reduced from 1st week until 3 months for both procedures. Similar significant reductions were seen for turbinate size, edema and secretions. However, there was no significant difference in symptoms and turbinate size reduction were seen between both groups at the first postoperative week, 2nd and 3rd postoperative months. There was significant longer operating time for CAT when compared to MAT (p = 0.001). The postoperative complications of bleeding, crusting and synechiae did not occur in both groups.
CONCLUSION: Both MAT and CAT were equally effective in improving nasal symptoms and achieving turbinate size reduction in patients with inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Both MAT and CAT offer maximal relieve in patients experiencing inferior turbinates hypertrophy by removing the hypertrophied soft tissue together with the turbinate bone without any complications.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A prospective interventional study was conducted. Evaluation took place during the first visit (week 0) and second visit (week 12). Symptoms of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhoea, cough and snoring were assessed, and an overall total symptoms score was obtained. A rigid nasoendoscopic examination using a four-grading system of adenoid size from 1 to 4 was performed. Patients were treated with MF intranasal spray for 12 weeks. Patients' aged 7-11-years old used 1 spray in each nostril once daily, while patients aged 12-17 used two sprays in each nostril once daily. Reassessment was carried out during the second visit (week 12).
RESULTS: A total of 74 patients was recruited. There were significant improvements from week 0 to week 12 in the symptoms' score for nose obstruction, rhinorrhoea, cough, snoring including the total nasal symptoms' score (p<0.001). AH significantly reduced in size from week 0 (2.89±.87) to week 12 (1.88±.83) (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: MF intranasal spray is effective in improving the symptoms attributed to AH as well as reducing the adenoid size. MF intranasal spray is advocated as a treatment option before adenoidectomy is considered.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was carried out at two tertiary hospitals. 32 patients diagnosed with chronic rhinosinusitis and had underwent endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled. The study group received 2 mL of Tualang honey nasal dressing and the control group received nasal dressing with 2 mL of triamcinolone 20 mg/mL as positive control. A 2 cm nasal dressing was placed longitudinally into the middle meatuses of both nasal cavities. Postoperative healing assessments of edema, crusting, secretions, scarring and symptoms were performed at postoperative day 7, 14, 28 and at 3 months using Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 questionnaire and modified Lund-Kennedy scoring system.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences noted in the scores of Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 and modified Lund-Kennedy at Day 7, 14 and 28 (p>0.05) for both groups. At 3rd month, patients in the triamcinolone group had lesser symptoms and better endoscopic findings (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Tualang honey is not as effective as steroid in achieving good wound healing and surgical outcomes in post endoscopic sinus surgery patients. Thus, it is not suitable as a substitute for steroid to reduce symptoms and prevent recurrence of disease.