Acta Scientific Otolaryngology (ASOL) (ISSN: 2582-5550)

Research Article Volume 3 Issue 9

Uncorrectable Dimensions in Congenital Canal Atresia Making Us to Revise Operative Candidacy and Patient Selection

Wael A Alzamil*

Otorhinolaryngology, Hearing and Speech Institute, Cairo, Egypt

*Corresponding Author: Wael A Alzamil, Otorhinolaryngology, Hearing and Speech Institute, Cairo, Egypt.

Received: July 10, 2021; Published: July 22, 2021

Abstract

Background: Congenital aural atresia is common birth defects and is often associated with au­ricular and middle ear deformities. The external auditory canal anomaly varies from slightly narrow to complete atresia. Congenital external auditory canal steno­sis is defined by Jahrsdoerfer., et al. as an EAC with a diameter of less than 4 mm [1]. The surgical management for canal atresia and stenosis is aimed to improve hearing and establish an appropriate auditory canal status for possible application of hearing aids. In clinical practice, we found that patients with canal stenosis and partial atresia have a better postoperative hearing improvement and few­er postoperative complications than those with complete canal atresia [2]. By analyzing the temporal CT images and intraoperative findings in patients with canal atresia and comparing those with images and intraoperative findings from normal canals, we further understand ex­ternal and middle ear development to improve surgical candida­cy selection and avoid unnecessary complications [3]. In addition to the status of the ossicu­lar chain, the degree of development and pneumatization of the tympanic cavity and mastoid, and the course of the facial nerve, the most important information taken from CT and intraoperative findings are the dimensions of the proposed future canal. There are main three dimensions which are the lateral and medial canal diameters and the depth of the canal. Each diameter has two main diagonals, the antero posterior dimension and the supero inferior dimension. This study will focus on the dimensions of the created canal or cavity and whether it is correctable or uncorrectable.

Aim of the Study: To match the C.T. scan and intraoperative findings with the surgical outcome for patients with congenital canal atresia and illustrate the operated uncorrectable dimensions with unfavorable outcome for later proper patient selection and surgical candidacy considerations.

Patients and Methods: A prospective, study conducted from September 2017 to December 2020 on 50 patients suffering congenital canal atresia. Patients have been subjected to preoperative audiological assessment and high resolution C.T. scanning. All patients addressing the study have been scored according to the Jahrsdoerfer Grading Scale selecting patients with scores above 6 (50 patients). All patients have undergone surgical meatocanaloplasty via anterior approach or posterior approach according to the C.T. findings. Intraoperative data collection was done to be matched with preoperative C.T. data and correlated later on with the final outcome. Postoperative regular follow up visits were done obligatory every two to three weeks for at least six months and for regular packing.

Results: Data collection was done involving intraoperative anatomical findings, difficulties or complications, immediate and late postoperative results including the final outcome. Intraoperative measurements have showed marked reduction of the depth of the cavity or the created canal ranging from 1 to 1.5 cm in 47 operated ears having complete atresia and more favorable depth ranging from 1.75 to 2.25 cm in the last three patients with C.T. evidence of partial atresia and less affected tympanic ring. Regarding the antero-posterior distance of the cavity, it was doubled and tripled after radical mastoidectomy in the 47 patients of complete atresia whoever in the three partial atresia patients who have operated via the anterior approach the dimension was equal to the normal auditory canal (0.7 - 1 cm). The supero-inferior dimension was markedly less even after Atticotomy in the 47 patients undergoing radical mastoidectomy with a range of 1 - 1.5 cm. It measured 0.7 - 1 cm in the three patients of partial atresia. No major intraoperative complications were recorded except one 4 years old female who suffered ipsilateral immediate postoperative complete facial paralysis who recovered completely after 4 months. Follow up of all patients recorded progressive circumferential narrowing of their canals and progressive reduction their depth. The final outcome showed shallow canals in 48 patients of depth not more than 1.2 cm and less shallow canals in two patients with their depth 2 cm.

Conclusion: Strict analysis of the C.T. data and intraoperative findings in patients of congenital canal atresia proves their inoperability due to the uncorrectable dimensions even for those patients with the highest Jahrsdoerfer score due to lack of full dimension consideration.

Keywords: Uncorrectable Canal Dimensions; Congenital Canal Atresia

References

  1. Curtin HD. “Congenital malformations of the ear”. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America2 (1988): 317-336.
  2. Zhang TY., et al. “Management of congeni¬tal meatal stenosis and atresia: impact factors on long-term results and surgical strategy”. Chinese Journal of Otolaryngology1 (2012): 15-18.
  3. Yeakley JW and Jahrsdoerfer RA. “CT evaluation of congenital aural atresia: what the radiologist and surgeon need to know”. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography5 (1996): 724-731.
  4. Fuchs JC and Tucker AS. “Development and Integration of the Ear”. Current Topics in Developmental Biology 115 (2015): 213-232.
  5. Anthwal N and Thompson H. “The development of the mammalian outer and middle ear”. Journal of Anatomy2 (2016): 217-232.
  6. Hall JW. “Development of the ear and hearing”. Journal of Perinatology8-2 (2000): S12-20.
  7. Giraldez F and Fritzsch B. “The molecular biology of ear development - "Twenty years are nothing". The International Journal of Developmental Biology 6-7 (2007): 429-438.
  8. Solomon KS., et al. “Genetic interactions underlying otic placode induction and formation”. Developmental Dynamics 3 (2004): 419-433.
  9. Chang W., et al. “The development of semicircular canals in the inner ear: role of FGFs in sensory cristae”. Development 17 (2004): 4201-4211.
  10. Barrionuevo F., et al. “Sox9 is required for invagination of the otic placode in mice”. Developmental Biology 1 (2008): 213-224.
  11. Urness LD., et al. “FGF signaling regulates otic placode induction and refinement by controlling both ectodermal target genes and hindbrain Wnt8a”. Developmental Biology 2 (2010): 595-604.
  12. Hans S., et al. “Fgf-dependent otic induction requires competence provided by Foxi1 and Dlx3b”. BMC Developmental Biology 7 (2007): 5.
  13. Ohyama T., et al. “Wnt signals mediate a fate decision between otic placode and epidermis”. Development5 (2006): 865-875.
  14. Klockars T and Rautio J. “Embryology and epidemiology of microtia”. Facial Plastic Surgery3 (2009): 145-148.
  15. Ikui A., et al. “Postnatal development of the tympanic cavity: a computer-aided reconstruction and measure¬ment study”. Acta Oto-Laryngologica3 (2000): 375-379.
  16. Jahrsdoerfer RA., et al. “Grad¬ing system for the selection of patients with congenital aural atresia”. American Journal of Otolaryngology1 (1992): 6-12.
  17. Shonka DC Jr., et al. “The Jahrsdoerfer grad¬ing scale in surgery to repair congenital aural atresia”. Archives of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery8 (2008): 873-877.
  18. Tos M. “Anatomy and histology of the middle ear”. Clinical Reviews in Allergy and Immunology 4 (1984): 267-284.
  19. Takegoshi H and Kaga K. “Difference in facial canal anatomy in terms of severity of microtia and deformity of middle ear in patients with microtia”. Laryngoscope 4 (2003): 635-639.

 

  1. Dedhia K., et al. “Anatomic variants on computed tomography in congenital aural atresia”. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery2 (2012): 323-328.
  2. Osborn AJ., et al. “Middle ear volume as an adjunct measure in congenital aural atresia”. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology7 (2011): 910-914.
  3. Kelley PE and Scholes MA. “Microtia and congenital aural atresia”. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America1 (2007): 61-80.
  4. Schuknecht HF. “Congenital aural atresia”. Laryngoscope9 (1989): 908-917.
  5. Oliver ER., et al. “Middle ear dimensions in congenital aural atresia and hearing outcomes after atresiaplasty”. Otology and Neurotology6 (2010): 946-953.
  6. Kountakis SE., et al. “Microtia grade as an indicator of middle ear development in aural atresia”. Archives of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery8 (1995): 885-886.
  7. Mukherji SK., et al. “Imag¬ing of congenital anomalies of the branchial apparatus”. Neuroimaging Clinics of North America1 (2000): 75-93.
  8. Benton C and Bellet PS. “Imaging of congenital anomalies of the tempo¬ral bone”. Neuroimaging Clinics of North America1 (2000): 35-53.
  9. Fu Y and Zhang T. “Facial nerve lying lateral to ossicles in one case of congenital aural atresia”. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology4 (2011): 597-599.
  10. Jahrsdoerfer RA., et al. “Surface con¬tour three-dimensional imaging in congenital aural atresia”. Archives of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery1 (1993): 95-99.
  11. Swartz JD and Faerber EN. “Congenital malformations of the external and middle ear: high-resolution CT findings of surgical import”. American Journal of Roentgenology3 (1985): 501-506.
  12. Yellon RF and Branstetter BF. “Prospective blinded study of comput¬ed tomography in congenital aural atresia”. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology 11 (2010): 1286-1291.
  13. Hill CA and Richtsmeier JT. “A quantitative method for the evaluation of three-dimensional structure of temporal bone pneumatization”. Journal of Human Evolution 4 (2008): 682-690.
  14. Vrabec JT., et al. “3D CT imaging method for measuring temporal bone aeration”. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 8 (2002): 831-835.

Citation

Citation: Wael A Alzamil. “Uncorrectable Dimensions in Congenital Canal Atresia Making Us to Revise Operative Candidacy and Patient Selection".Acta Scientific Otolaryngology 3.9 (2021): 104-113.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Wael A Alzamil. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.




Metrics

Acceptance rate34%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days
Impact Factor0.871

Indexed In








News and Events


  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is May 25, 2022.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of “Best Article of the Issue”.
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.
  • Contact US