The Effect of the Status of the Ossicular Chain and Choice of Graft Material on Hearing Outcomes in Pediatric Cholesteatoma Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Compare hearing benefit of incus preservation in primary cholesteatoma surgery versus cartilage-myringostapediopexy. METHODS: Prospective cohort study in a tertiary referral center. Tympanoplasty utilizing cartilage or other grafts, with or without intact incus was performed in 195 ears (187 children) with intact stapes. Outcome measures were pre and post-operative four-tone air conduction (AC) threshold (0.5, 1, 2, 4 kHz) and proportion with normal hearing (AC ≤ 30 dB HL) at 12 months. RESULTS: Ears with intact ossicles had better post-operative AC thresholds than those with incus eroded or removed (median 20 dB HL vs. 30 dB HL, Mann-Whitney P < .001). The normal hearing rate was 81/106 (74%) with intact incus and 46/89 (52%) without (Fisher's exact P = .001). Ears without intact incus and a cartilage-myringostapediopexy had better post-operative thresholds than those with a non-cartilage graft (28.8 dB HL vs. 36.3 dB HL, Mann-Whitney P = .005). Of ears without intact incus, 37/59 (63%) with a cartilage-myringostapediopexy and 9/30 (30%) with a non-cartilage graft had normal hearing post-operatively (Fisher's exact P = .007). By preserving the incus in 12 ears, 1 more ear would have normal hearing than with incus removal plus cartilage-myringostapediopexy (NNT = 12 (CI 3.6-); Fisher's exact = 0.1). CONCLUSION: Preserving an intact ossicular chain conveys a small but significant hearing benefit in cholesteatoma surgery, the magnitude of which should be considered before deciding to remove the intact incus. Cartilage-myringostapediopexy provides a significant gain in hearing when the incus is absent, even without a partial ossicular replacement prosthesis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".