Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:12:10.983Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Long-term middle-ear ventilation with subannular tubes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2010

A Daudia*
Affiliation:
Department of ENT Surgery, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK
S Yelavich
Affiliation:
Department of ENT Surgery, Wellington Hospital, New Zealand
P J D Dawes
Affiliation:
Department of ENT Surgery, Dunedin Hospital, New Zealand
*
Address for correspondence: Mr A Daudia, ENT Consultant, Dept of ENT Surgery, Southmead Hospital, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK. E-mail: anurag.daudia@nbt.nhs.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

Long-term tympanostomy tubes are associated with a significant rate of complications, particularly persistent perforation. We describe the outcomes of 57 subannular ventilation tube insertions in 45 consecutive patients.

Design:

Retrospective case series.

Subjects:

We studied 45 consecutive patients with chronic otitis media with effusion and hearing loss (n = 54 cases), associated with adhesive otitis media (n = 7), tympanic membrane retraction (n = 17) and tympanic membrane perforation (n = 3). The mean follow up was 48 months (range, nine to 95 months).

Results:

The mean duration of ventilation for tubes still in situ was 22 months (range, one to 76 months; n = 29), and for tubes which extruded or were removed 23 months (range, one to 85 months; n = 28). The mean improvement in air–bone gap was 14 dB (range, −14 to 35 dB). Complications included blockage (16 per cent), perforation after extrusion (9 per cent), granulation (5 per cent) and infection (4 per cent).

Conclusion:

Subannular ventilation tubes provide an effective option for management of intractable middle-ear effusion and eustachian tube dysfunction.

Information

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2010
Figure 0

Table I Tube insertions

Figure 1

Table II Other procedures performed at time of tube insertion*

Figure 2

Table III Patients' pre- vs post-operative air–bone gap*

Figure 3

Table IV Complications