Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T14:59:37.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An audit of ‘dead ear’ after ear surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2013

P Prinsley
P Prinsley*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, James Paget University Hospital, Great Yarmouth, and Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Mr P Prinsley, 26 Eaton Rd, Norwich NR4 6PZ, UK E-mail: prinsley@mac.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

‘Dead ear’ is a rare and serious complication of ear surgery. This paper presents an audit of this complication.

Method:

Over 6 years, data for all 617 middle-ear operations performed under the care of a single consultant were recorded for the International Otology Audit. All cases of dead ear were identified and assessed.

Results:

A post-operative dead ear occurred in 6 cases (approximately 1 per cent). No cases of post-operative dead ear occurred following the 83 otosclerosis operations and the 62 children's procedures. Amongst 187 adult patients undergoing mastoid surgery for cholesteatoma, there were 5 cases of post-operative dead ear (2.7 per cent of cases).

Conclusion:

The occurrence of dead ear after cholesteatoma surgery in adults is less rare than previously thought. This has implications for the surgical consenting process. The current series suggests that, whilst dead ear is often avoidable, it is sometimes inevitable.

Keywords

CholesteatomaOtologic Surgical ProceduresComplicationsInformed Consent
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 127 , Issue 12 , December 2013 , pp. 1177 - 1183
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Van Rompaey, V, Yung, M, Van Heyning, P. Auditing in middle ear surgery, feasibility of the common otology data base. B-ENT 2010;6:189–94Google Scholar
2Pulec, JL. Labyrinthine fistula from cholesteatoma: surgical management. Ear Nose Throat J 1996;75:143–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Harkness, P, Brown, P, Fowler, S, Grant, H, Ryan, R, Topham, J. Mastoidectomy audit: results of the Royal College of Surgeons of England comparative audit of ENT surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 1995;20:89–94CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Banarjee, A, Flood, LM, Yates, P, Clifford, K. Computed tomography in suppurative ear disease: does it influence management? J Laryngol Otol 2003;117:454–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Stephenson, MF, Saliba, I. Prognostic indicators of hearing after complete resection of cholesteatoma causing a labyrinthine fistula. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2011;268:1705–11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Toner, JG, Smyth, GD. Surgical treatment of cholesteatoma: a comparison of three techniques. Am J Otol 1990;11:247–9Google ScholarPubMed
7Sade, J. Surgical planning of the treatment of cholesteatoma and postoperative follow-up. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2000;109:372–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Dornhoffer, JL, Milewski, C. Management of the open labyrinth. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;112:410–14CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Vartiainen, E. What is the best method of treatment for labyrinthine fistula caused by cholesteatoma? Clin Otolaryngol 1992;17:258–60CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Vartiainen, E, Seppa, J. Results of bone conduction following surgery for chronic ear disease. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1997;254:384–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Mahendran, S, Bennett, AM, Jones, SE, Young, BE, Prinsley, PR. Audit of specialist registrar training in tympanomastoid surgery for chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol 2006;3:193–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar