MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390772413 · doi:10.3390/audiolres14010006

Suspicion and Treatment of Perilymphatic Fistula: A Prospective Clinical Study

2024· article· en· W4390772413 on OpenAlexaff
Issam Saliba, Naif Bawazeer, S. Belhassen

Bibliographic record

VenueAudiology Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFistulaProspective cohort studyAudiogramSurgeryVestibular systemTertiary careSignificant differencePhysical examinationHearing lossAudiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Since the discovery of the perilymphatic fistula (PLF), the diagnosis and treatment remain controversial. If successfully recognized, the PLF is surgically repairable with an obliteration of the fistula site. Successful treatment has a major impact on patient’s quality of life with an improvement in their audiological and vestibular symptoms. Objective: To prospectively investigate patients’ clinical and audiological evolution with PLF suspicion after middle ear exploration and obliteration of the round and oval window. Study Design: Prospective comparative study. Setting: Tertiary care center. Methods: Patients were divided into two groups: Group I consisted of patients where no PLF had been identified intraoperatively at the oval and/or at the round window, and Group II consisted of patients where a fistula had been visualized. Patient assessment was a combination of past medical history, the presence of any risk factors, cochlear and vestibular symptoms, a physical examination, temporal bone imaging, audiograms, and a videonystagmogram (VNG). Results: A total of 98 patients were divided into two groups: 62 in Group I and 36 in Group II. A statistically significant difference regarding gender was observed in Group II (83.3% of males vs. 16.7% of females, p = 0.008). A total of 14 cases (4 and 10 in Groups I and II, respectively) were operated for a recurrent PLF. Fat graft material was used in the majority of their previous surgery; however, no difference was found when comparing fat to other materials. In addition, no statistically significant difference was noted between Groups I and II concerning predisposing factors, imaging, VNG, symptom evolution, or a physical exam before the surgery and at 12 months post-operative. However, both groups showed statistically significant hearing and vestibular improvement. On the other hand, the air conduction (AC) and bone conduction (BC) at each frequency were not statistically different between the two groups before surgery but showed statistically significant improvement at 12 months post-operatively, especially for the BC at the frequencies 250 (p = 0.02), 500 (p = 0.0008), and 1000 Hz (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Whenever you suspect a perilymphatic fistula, do not hesitate to explore middle ear and do window obliterations using a tragal perichondrium material. Our data showed that cochlear and vestibular symptoms improved whether a fistula had been identified or not.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.231
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAudiology ResearchSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207