Two‐Year Outcomes After Pediatric In‐Office Tympanostomy Using Lidocaine/Epinephrine Iontophoresis and an Automated Tube Delivery System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate 2-year outcomes after lidocaine/epinephrine iontophoresis and tympanostomy using an automated tube delivery system for pediatric tube placement in-office. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-arm. SETTING: Eighteen otolaryngology practices. METHODS: Children age 6 months to 12 years indicated for tympanostomy were enrolled between October 2017 and February 2019. Local anesthesia of the tympanic membrane was achieved via lidocaine/epinephrine iontophoresis and tympanostomy was completed using an automated tube delivery system (the Tula® System). An additional Lead-In cohort of patients underwent tube placement in the operating room (OR) under general anesthesia using only the tube delivery system. Patients were followed for 2 years or until tube extrusion, whichever occurred first. Otoscopy and tympanometry were performed at 3 weeks, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Tube retention, patency, and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: Tubes were placed in-office for 269 patients (449 ears) and in the OR for 68 patients (131 ears) (mean age, 4.5 years). The median and mean times to tube extrusion for the combined OR and In-Office cohorts were 15.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.41-19.05) and 16.79 (95% CI: 16.16-17.42) months, respectively. Sequelae included ongoing perforation for 1.9% of ears (11/580) and medial tube displacement for 0.2% (1/580) observed at 18 months. Over a mean follow-up of 14.3 months, 30.3% (176/580) of ears had otorrhea and 14.3% (83/580) had occluded tubes. CONCLUSION: In-office pediatric tympanostomy using lidocaine/epinephrine iontophoresis and automated tube delivery results in tube retention within the ranges described for similar grommet-type tubes and complication rates consistent with traditional tube placement in the OR.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".