Microdrill in endoscopic stapes surgery: Is it safe?

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the safety of using a microdrill in endoscopic vs microscopic stapes surgery.

Materials and methods: A retrospective review of 29 adult ears with otosclerosis who underwent either an endoscopic or microscopic approach to microdrill stapedotomy.

Primary outcome: Determine if transcanal endoscopic stapes surgery with the microdrill is as safe as microscopic stapes surgery. Secondary outcome: Bone and air pure-tone averages, air-bone gap, speech discrimination, overall surgical cost, and operative time were measured and analyzed. Complications such as post-operative dysgeusia, vertigo, readmission, revision and hearing loss were noted.

Results: 29 patients with otosclerosis were retrospectively reviewed, in total 14 endoscopic and 15 microscopic approaches were included, all performed over one-year period. None of the endoscopic surgeries require conversion to the microscope. No statistically significant audiometric differences between the endoscopic vs microscopic approaches in air pure-tone averages and air-bone gap. There were 82.8% air-bone gap closure to <15 dB with no significant difference in the percent of such closures between the endoscopic (85.7%) and microscopic groups (80%, P = .68). Three prostheses were used: 4.25 mm (17.2%), 4.5 mm (58.6%) and the 4.75 mm (24.1%) smart/eclipse. Endoscopic median operative time was 51 min vs 42 min for microscopic approach (P =.004).

Conclusions: The endoscopic with microdrill approach is criticized to lack depth perception, especially when using a microdrill to perform in stapedotomies. Our study showcases that using the microdrill use produces minimal differences in outcomes, cost, and is a safe modality to stapes surgery in both approaches.

Keywords: Endoscope; Microdrill; Microscope; Stapedotomy; Stapes.