KTP laser therapy for refractory chronic myringitis: a case series and comparative outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to compare KTP (potassium titanyl phosphate) laser therapy and dextracin ear drops for treatment of chronic myringitis. Methods A case series involving 31 patients (18 laser group; 13 dextracin group). Primary outcomes included otorrhoea resolution, improvement in Chronic Ear Survey scores and endoscopic resolution. Secondary outcomes included hearing outcome and complications. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U , Wilcoxon signed-rank and Fisher’s exact tests. Results The laser group had a higher rate of otorrhoea resolution 66.67 per cent ( n = 12) vs 15.38 per cent ( n = 2) ( p = 0.006), showed significant improvement in symptom scores (median 31.43; p = 0.005) and medical resource use (16.67; p < 0.001) and had a significant myringitis area reduction of 31.84 per cent ( p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in Chronic Ear Survey scores and area reduction in the dextracin group. One laser-group patient developed a permanent perforation. Conclusion KTP laser therapy is effective for refractory chronic myringitis, offering superior symptom relief and reduced healthcare utilisation compared to topical treatment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".