Reconstruction of the Posterior Canal Wall with Proplast
Many ears with prior radical or modified radical mastoidectomy operations can be rehabilitated by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with the porous biocompatible implant material Proplast. Many techniques have been advanced for reconstruction of the posterior canal wall and/or obliteration...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery 1984-06, Vol.92 (3), p.329-333 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 333 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 329 |
container_title | Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery |
container_volume | 92 |
creator | Shea, John J. Malenbaum, Bruce T. Moretz, William H. |
description | Many ears with prior radical or modified radical mastoidectomy operations can be rehabilitated by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with the porous biocompatible implant material Proplast. Many techniques have been advanced for reconstruction of the posterior canal wall and/or obliteration of the mastoid bowl. We prefer reconstruction of the posterior canal wall to obliteration of the mastoid bowl on the theoretical grounds that with obliteration you lose the pneumatic buffer of the mastoid air cell system and you might be burying infection and/or cholesteatoma in the depths of the mastoid. In this article we shall present our results with elimination of the open mastoid bowl by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast. A retrospective study of 83 consecutive patients who underwent reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast during the 5-year period 1974 to 1978 was undertaken. The surgical technique consisted of rebuilding the tympanic membrane, when necessary, repairing the ossicular chain, when necessary, and reconstructing the posterior canal wall. The overall success rate for the posterior canal wall reconstructions was 46% (38 of 83). However, after modifications were made in the technique, especially in the use of thicker fascia and/or perichondria and periosteum over the Proplast, the success rate increased dramatically to 68% (19 of 28). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/019459988409200316 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_81175202</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_019459988409200316</sage_id><sourcerecordid>81175202</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-c712ae6bfa07497223a110c17e1c3ca86be8ef5207b3fa8d577c4274327ee0a73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkEFLw0AQhRdRaq3-AUHIyVvszm6a2XjTYq0gtojiMWy2E5uSZutuQum_NyXFiyCe5vDe9xg-xi6B3wAgDjkk0ShJlIp4IjiXEB-xPvAEw1gBHrP-vhDuG6fszPsV5zyOEXusF0cSJEZ9pl7J2MrXrjF1YavA5kG9pGBufU2usC4Y60qXwYcuy2Bb1Mtg7uym1L4-Zye5Lj1dHO6AvU8e3sbT8Hn2-DS-ew6NVAmEBkFoirNcc4wSFEJqAG4ACYw0WsUZKcpHgmMmc60WI0QTCYykQCKuUQ7Ydbe7cfarIV-n68IbKktdkW18qloTLS7aouiKxlnvHeXpxhVr7XYp8HSvK_2tq4WuDutNtqbFD3Lw0-a3Xb4tStr9YzGdTV_uJxykgBYedrDXn5SubONalf6vd74BabKBpA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>81175202</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reconstruction of the Posterior Canal Wall with Proplast</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Shea, John J. ; Malenbaum, Bruce T. ; Moretz, William H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Shea, John J. ; Malenbaum, Bruce T. ; Moretz, William H.</creatorcontrib><description>Many ears with prior radical or modified radical mastoidectomy operations can be rehabilitated by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with the porous biocompatible implant material Proplast. Many techniques have been advanced for reconstruction of the posterior canal wall and/or obliteration of the mastoid bowl. We prefer reconstruction of the posterior canal wall to obliteration of the mastoid bowl on the theoretical grounds that with obliteration you lose the pneumatic buffer of the mastoid air cell system and you might be burying infection and/or cholesteatoma in the depths of the mastoid. In this article we shall present our results with elimination of the open mastoid bowl by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast. A retrospective study of 83 consecutive patients who underwent reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast during the 5-year period 1974 to 1978 was undertaken. The surgical technique consisted of rebuilding the tympanic membrane, when necessary, repairing the ossicular chain, when necessary, and reconstructing the posterior canal wall. The overall success rate for the posterior canal wall reconstructions was 46% (38 of 83). However, after modifications were made in the technique, especially in the use of thicker fascia and/or perichondria and periosteum over the Proplast, the success rate increased dramatically to 68% (19 of 28).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0194-5998</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/019459988409200316</identifier><identifier>PMID: 6431374</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Ear Canal - surgery ; Ear Ossicles - surgery ; Humans ; Mastoid - surgery ; Polytetrafluoroethylene ; Proplast ; Prostheses and Implants ; Retrospective Studies ; Tympanoplasty</subject><ispartof>Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, 1984-06, Vol.92 (3), p.329-333</ispartof><rights>1984 SAGE Publications</rights><rights>1984 American Association of Otolaryngology‐Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO‐HNSF)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-c712ae6bfa07497223a110c17e1c3ca86be8ef5207b3fa8d577c4274327ee0a73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-c712ae6bfa07497223a110c17e1c3ca86be8ef5207b3fa8d577c4274327ee0a73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1177%2F019459988409200316$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1177%2F019459988409200316$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6431374$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shea, John J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malenbaum, Bruce T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moretz, William H.</creatorcontrib><title>Reconstruction of the Posterior Canal Wall with Proplast</title><title>Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery</title><addtitle>Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg</addtitle><description>Many ears with prior radical or modified radical mastoidectomy operations can be rehabilitated by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with the porous biocompatible implant material Proplast. Many techniques have been advanced for reconstruction of the posterior canal wall and/or obliteration of the mastoid bowl. We prefer reconstruction of the posterior canal wall to obliteration of the mastoid bowl on the theoretical grounds that with obliteration you lose the pneumatic buffer of the mastoid air cell system and you might be burying infection and/or cholesteatoma in the depths of the mastoid. In this article we shall present our results with elimination of the open mastoid bowl by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast. A retrospective study of 83 consecutive patients who underwent reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast during the 5-year period 1974 to 1978 was undertaken. The surgical technique consisted of rebuilding the tympanic membrane, when necessary, repairing the ossicular chain, when necessary, and reconstructing the posterior canal wall. The overall success rate for the posterior canal wall reconstructions was 46% (38 of 83). However, after modifications were made in the technique, especially in the use of thicker fascia and/or perichondria and periosteum over the Proplast, the success rate increased dramatically to 68% (19 of 28).</description><subject>Ear Canal - surgery</subject><subject>Ear Ossicles - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mastoid - surgery</subject><subject>Polytetrafluoroethylene</subject><subject>Proplast</subject><subject>Prostheses and Implants</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Tympanoplasty</subject><issn>0194-5998</issn><issn>1097-6817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1984</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkEFLw0AQhRdRaq3-AUHIyVvszm6a2XjTYq0gtojiMWy2E5uSZutuQum_NyXFiyCe5vDe9xg-xi6B3wAgDjkk0ShJlIp4IjiXEB-xPvAEw1gBHrP-vhDuG6fszPsV5zyOEXusF0cSJEZ9pl7J2MrXrjF1YavA5kG9pGBufU2usC4Y60qXwYcuy2Bb1Mtg7uym1L4-Zye5Lj1dHO6AvU8e3sbT8Hn2-DS-ew6NVAmEBkFoirNcc4wSFEJqAG4ACYw0WsUZKcpHgmMmc60WI0QTCYykQCKuUQ7Ydbe7cfarIV-n68IbKktdkW18qloTLS7aouiKxlnvHeXpxhVr7XYp8HSvK_2tq4WuDutNtqbFD3Lw0-a3Xb4tStr9YzGdTV_uJxykgBYedrDXn5SubONalf6vd74BabKBpA</recordid><startdate>198406</startdate><enddate>198406</enddate><creator>Shea, John J.</creator><creator>Malenbaum, Bruce T.</creator><creator>Moretz, William H.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198406</creationdate><title>Reconstruction of the Posterior Canal Wall with Proplast</title><author>Shea, John J. ; Malenbaum, Bruce T. ; Moretz, William H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-c712ae6bfa07497223a110c17e1c3ca86be8ef5207b3fa8d577c4274327ee0a73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1984</creationdate><topic>Ear Canal - surgery</topic><topic>Ear Ossicles - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mastoid - surgery</topic><topic>Polytetrafluoroethylene</topic><topic>Proplast</topic><topic>Prostheses and Implants</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Tympanoplasty</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shea, John J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malenbaum, Bruce T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moretz, William H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><jtitle>Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shea, John J.</au><au>Malenbaum, Bruce T.</au><au>Moretz, William H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reconstruction of the Posterior Canal Wall with Proplast</atitle><jtitle>Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg</addtitle><date>1984-06</date><risdate>1984</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>329</spage><epage>333</epage><pages>329-333</pages><issn>0194-5998</issn><eissn>1097-6817</eissn><abstract>Many ears with prior radical or modified radical mastoidectomy operations can be rehabilitated by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with the porous biocompatible implant material Proplast. Many techniques have been advanced for reconstruction of the posterior canal wall and/or obliteration of the mastoid bowl. We prefer reconstruction of the posterior canal wall to obliteration of the mastoid bowl on the theoretical grounds that with obliteration you lose the pneumatic buffer of the mastoid air cell system and you might be burying infection and/or cholesteatoma in the depths of the mastoid. In this article we shall present our results with elimination of the open mastoid bowl by reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast. A retrospective study of 83 consecutive patients who underwent reconstruction of the posterior canal wall with Proplast during the 5-year period 1974 to 1978 was undertaken. The surgical technique consisted of rebuilding the tympanic membrane, when necessary, repairing the ossicular chain, when necessary, and reconstructing the posterior canal wall. The overall success rate for the posterior canal wall reconstructions was 46% (38 of 83). However, after modifications were made in the technique, especially in the use of thicker fascia and/or perichondria and periosteum over the Proplast, the success rate increased dramatically to 68% (19 of 28).</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>6431374</pmid><doi>10.1177/019459988409200316</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0194-5998 |
ispartof | Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, 1984-06, Vol.92 (3), p.329-333 |
issn | 0194-5998 1097-6817 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_81175202 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | Ear Canal - surgery Ear Ossicles - surgery Humans Mastoid - surgery Polytetrafluoroethylene Proplast Prostheses and Implants Retrospective Studies Tympanoplasty |
title | Reconstruction of the Posterior Canal Wall with Proplast |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T12%3A01%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reconstruction%20of%20the%20Posterior%20Canal%20Wall%20with%20Proplast&rft.jtitle=Otolaryngology-head%20and%20neck%20surgery&rft.au=Shea,%20John%20J.&rft.date=1984-06&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=329&rft.epage=333&rft.pages=329-333&rft.issn=0194-5998&rft.eissn=1097-6817&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/019459988409200316&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E81175202%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=81175202&rft_id=info:pmid/6431374&rft_sage_id=10.1177_019459988409200316&rfr_iscdi=true |