Stapedotomy using a 4 mm endoscope: any advantage over a microscope?

A Bhardwaj,A Anant,N Bharadwaj,A Gupta,S Gupta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215118001548

Abstract:Objectives: To ascertain the feasibility of endoscopic (4 mm) stapedotomy, and compare intra- and post-operative variations with microscopic stapedotomies. Methods: Forty otosclerosis patients were scheduled for microscopic or endoscopic stapedotomy. Intra-operative variables compared were: incision, canalplasty, canal wall curettage for ossicular assessment, chorda tympani manipulation, ability to perform stapes footplate perforation before its supra-structure removal, and operative time. Post-operative variables compared were ear pain and hearing improvement. Results: Of the 20 microscopy patients, 4 required endaural incision and canalplasty because of canal overhangs, and 7 required canal wall curettage for ossicular assessment. None of the 20 endoscopy patients required these procedures. Chorda tympani was manipulated in 13 and 6 patients in the microscopy and endoscopy groups respectively, while the stapes footplate could be perforated in 5 and 11 patients respectively. Mean operative time was 50.25 and 76.05 minutes in the microscopy and endoscopy groups respectively. In the endoscopy group, mean air-bone gap was 37.12 and 10.73 dB pre- and post-operation respectively; in the microscopy group, these values were 35.95 and 13.81 dB. Conclusion: Endoscopic stapedotomy has comparable hearing outcomes. Sinonasal endoscope serves as a better tool for: minimal incision, canalplasty avoidance, less chorda tympani mobilisation, and stapes footplate perforation ability.