Primary Stapedectomy: A Retrospective Review of Surgical Results Using a Cold Steel Technique and Pre-Operative CT Correlates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Stapedectomy is an effective treatment option for patients with symptomatic otosclerosis. A common surgical technique today is laser stapedotomy, although the equipment required adds a significant cost to the procedure and may not be available in certain, particularly remote, centers. This study aimed to evaluate cold steel stapedectomy in a modern otology practice as a cost-effective and versatile alternative. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cold steel stapedectomy. The secondary objectives included characterizing the prevalence of relevant computed tomography (CT) findings and evaluating other factors such as piston size. DESIGN: A retrospective case series from April 2006 to November 2021. SETTING: A single tertiary care hospital in Montreal, QC, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with suspected otosclerosis and no prior stapes surgery. INTERVENTION: Cold steel primary stapedectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In primary analysis, change in pure tone thresholds, pure tone average (PTA), and complication rates were obtained. Secondary analysis measures included rates of relevant CT findings and change in PTA with piston size. RESULTS: A total of 302 cases were included in the analysis. The average change in air conduction PTA was a decrease of 27 dB, with 91% (276/302) having over 10 dB of improvement. The air-bone gap was closed to within 10 dB in 82% (248/302) of cases and within 20 dB in 96% (290/302) of cases. Overclosure occurred in 19% of cases, while only 4% resulted in worsened PTA bone conduction thresholds. In secondary analysis, 74% of CT scans demonstrated radiologic otosclerosis. Other findings included suspected superior semicircular canal dehiscence in 1.8%. CONCLUSION: Cold steel stapedectomy was demonstrated to be a safe and effective technique, with audiometric results comparable to laser and drill studies in recent literature. It should be considered as a cost-effective and global health accessible alternative. Additionally, CT scans can provide valuable information in the pre-operative workup.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".