Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T13:16:04.773Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hearing results of 1145 stapedotomies evaluated with Amsterdam hearing evaluation plots

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2009

V E Kisilevsky*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
S N Dutt
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Apollo Hospital, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
N A Bailie
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Toronto, Markham-Stouffville Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
J J Halik
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Otolaryngology, Markham-Stouffville Hospital, Markham, Ontario, Canada
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Vitaly Kisilevsky, 8 N, Room 873, Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2C4 Canada. Fax: +1 416 340 3327 E-mail: vitalykis@yahoo.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aims:

To evaluate the hearing results of a large series of primary stapedotomies, according to American Academy of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery guidelines and Amsterdam hearing evaluation plots.

Study design:

Retrospective chart review.

Methods:

The charts for 1369 consecutive stapedotomy cases were reviewed; 1145 cases of primary stapedotomy were included. Raw data from the audiometric database were evaluated using Amsterdam hearing evaluation plots. The effect on outcomes of using different audiological parameters was analysed.

Results:

A significant improvement was demonstrated in mean post-operative air conduction and speech reception thresholds, with no change in bone conduction. Air–bone gap closure of 10 dB or more was achieved in 82 per cent of cases. A ‘dead ear’ occurred in one patient (0.1 per cent).

Conclusion:

This study reports the largest series of primary stapedotomies evaluated with Amsterdam hearing evaluation plots. This method enables visual identification of successful and unfavourable results, providing more accurate and detailed presentation of surgical outcomes.

Information

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2009
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Reconstruction of pre-operative audiogram using mean air and bone conduction thresholds at 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 kHz.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 Reconstruction of post-operative audiogram using mean air and bone conduction thresholds at 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 kHz.

Figure 2

Table I Pre- and post-operative air and bone conduction by frequency

Figure 3

Fig. 3 Main audiometric parameters presented as box and whisker plot. BC = bone conduction; AC = air conduction; ABG = air–bone gap

Figure 4

Fig. 4 Hearing results at 4 kHz. Improved = >10 dB; unchanged = ≤10 dB; worse = >10 dB; AC = air conduction; BC = bone conduction

Figure 5

Table II Post-operative air–bone gap for the three common frequency combinations

Figure 6

Fig. 5 Amsterdam hearing evaluation plot. Preoperative BC plotted against postoperative BC. BC = bone conduction

Figure 7

Fig. 6 Amsterdam hearing evaluation plot. Postoperative gain in AC plotted against the preoperative ABG. AC = air conduction; ABG = air–bone gap

Figure 8

Table III Results for ABG closure to within 10 dB in recent, comparable studies