0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Article |

Prognostic Factors for Short-term Outcomes After Ossiculoplasty Using Multivariate Analysis With Logistic Regression FREE

Yasuo Mishiro, MD; Masafumi Sakagami, MD; Osamu Adachi, MD; Chieko Kakutani, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Otolaryngology, Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya City (Drs Mishiro, Sakagami, and Adachi), and Department of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, School of Public Health, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto (Dr Kakutani), Japan.


Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;135(8):738-741. doi:10.1001/archoto.2009.100.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Objective  To investigate prognostic factors for short-term hearing outcomes after ossiculoplasty.

Design  Retrospective study.

Setting  Tertiary referral and academic center.

Patients  Seven hundred twenty patients who underwent ossiculoplasty performed by a single surgeon from January 1, 1989, through December 31, 2006, and who were followed up for longer than 1 year.

Main Outcome Measures  Hearing outcomes were considered successful if the postoperative air-bone gap was 20 dB or less. The prognostic factors were analyzed using multivariate analysis with logistic regression.

Results  Hearing outcomes were successful in 505 patients (70.1%). Presence of the stapes superstructure, presence of the malleus handle, normal mucosa, normal stapes mobility, and use of local anesthesia were significantly favorable predictive factors.

Conclusions  Multivariate analysis should be performed to investigate prognostic factors of favorable short-term hearing outcomes after ossiculoplasty. Better knowledge of these predictive factors may contribute to the surgeon's judgment and the information given to patients.

The purpose of ossiculoplasty is to improve the hearing level. Many factors, such as eustachian tube function, the severity of disease, the presence of residual ossicular chain, the surgeon's skill, and the length of follow-up, affect the outcome of ossiculoplasty. In this article, we report prognostic factors for short-term hearing outcomes after ossiculoplasty performed by a single surgeon (Y.M.). We used multivariate analysis with logistic regression because hearing outcomes after ossiculoplasty can be affected by many factors and confounding factors should be excluded. Furthermore, we compared the significant prognostic factors we identified with those listed in previous reports.

From January 1, 1989, through December 31, 2006, 746 patients underwent ossiculoplasty performed by a single surgeon (Y.M.) at Osaka Rosai Hospital or Osaka University Hospital, Osaka, Japan, or Hyogo College of Medicine Hospital, Nishinomiya City, Japan. Of these, 720 patients (96.5%) were followed up for longer than 1 year. The pathogenesis of these 720 cases consisted of 458 cholesteatomas (63.6%), 126 cases of chronic otitis media with perforation (17.5%), 35 atelectatic ears (4.9%), and 101 other diseases such as tympanosclerosis and middle ear anomaly (14.0%). Table 1 lists the demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of 720 Patients Undergoing Ossiculoplasty

Until 1991, we preferred hydroxyapatite as the material for ossiculoplasty, but some extrusions of hydroxyapatite occurred during follow-up. Therefore, we have preferred autologous materials since 1992. The first choice is to use autologous ossicles, but, in patients with cholesteatoma, the ossicles may be missing or the use of ossicles affected by cholesteatoma may carry a risk of implanting cholesteatoma. The second choice is autologous auricular cartilage. However, auricular cartilage may sometimes be very thin in small women or in children. The third choice in such cases is autologous cortical bone. In our series, autologous auricular cartilage was used in most of the patients (521 [72.4%]).

During these 18 years, various techniques had been performed. However, in most of the patients who had the stapes superstructure, autologous incus was used for the incus transposition technique and cartilage was used as a double cartilage block (as described by Luetje and Denninghoff1). In patients without the stapes superstructure, we used incus or cartilage to create a slender prosthesis. We attached greater importance to placing the prosthesis vertical to the footplate rather than using the malleus handle. A 1-stage operation was performed in 516 patients (71.7%), and a 2-stage operation was performed in 204 (28.3%).

Among the 720 patients undergoing ossiculoplasty, the stapes superstructure was present in 509 (70.7%) and the malleus handle was present in 552 (76.7%). Five hundred sixty patients (77.8%) underwent primary surgery, and 160 (22.2%) underwent revision surgery. General anesthesia was used in most patients (593 [82.4%]).

The mobility of the stapes or the footplate was classified as normal or deteriorated (including fixed) in the surgical records, which noted the subjective estimation of the surgeon during the surgery, and was classified as normal in 577 patients (80.1%). The mucosa of the tympanic cavity was identified as normal or diseased (ie, thick or edematous) in the surgical records and was specified as normal in 544 patients (75.6%).

Audiometric data were calculated according to the 1995 American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery guidelines.2 However, thresholds at 3 kHz are not usually measured in Japan. Therefore, the mean of thresholds at 2 and 4 kHz were used to represent thresholds at 3 kHz. Postoperative hearing outcomes were categorized in 4 groups of 10-dB increments, and the hearing outcome was considered successful if the postoperative air-bone gap was 20 dB or less. The air conduction threshold 1 year after ossiculoplasty was used as the postoperative air-conduction threshold to determine the short-term outcome.

We used logistic regression analysis to predict which factors affect the short-term hearing outcomes of success vs failure after ossiculoplasty. The variables included in the logistic regression analysis were sex (male vs female), patient age (<16 vs ≥16 years), stapes superstructure (present vs absent), mucosa (normal vs diseased), stapes mobility (normal vs deteriorated), anesthesia (local vs general), type of surgery (primary vs revision), operation type (1-stage vs 2-stage), malleus handle (present vs absent), kind of prosthesis (cartilage vs others), and cholesteatoma (present vs absent). We used SPSS version 11.0J statistical software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, Illinois) to perform the analysis. P < .05 was considered significant.

Successful hearing outcomes were achieved in 505 patients (70.1%). Table 2 shows univariate analysis of short-term hearing outcomes after ossiculoplasty using logistic regression analysis. The presence of the stapes superstructure and the malleus handle, normal mucosa, primary surgery, and a 1-stage operation were significantly favorable predictors of ossiculoplasty outcome. Sex and age were excluded from multivariate analysis. Using backward selection, the presence of the stapes superstructure, malleus handle, and normal mucosa, and cholesteatoma; primary surgery; the operation type; stapes mobility; and the type of material and anesthesia used were tested by multivariate analysis. Cholesteatoma presence was dropped from the model first, then primary surgery, operation type, and material type used. In the final model, the presence of the stapes superstructure, the malleus handle, and normal mucosa; normal stapes mobility; and the use of local anesthesia remained significant predictive factors (Table 3).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Univariate Analysis of Short-term Hearing Outcomes After Ossiculoplasty in 720 Patients
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Multivariate Analysis Based on Short-term Hearing Outcomes After Ossiculoplasty in 720 Patients

Many reports have detailed the prognostic factors of tympanoplasty including ossiculoplasty.311 Bellucci3 classified all cases into those with a good prognosis (group 1), a fair prognosis (group 2), a poor prognosis (group 3), and a very poor prognosis (group 4) according to the degree of otorrhea and eustachian tube function. The author concluded that excellent outcomes could only be obtained in group 1; in the other 3 groups, outcomes were less successful. Austin4 advocated the following prognostic stratification: (1) disease categories, (2) disease stage categories, and (3) disease descriptors. Kartush5 proposed the Middle Ear Risk Index, which is a scoring system based on otorrhea, perforation, cholesteatoma, ossicular chain, middle ear granulation/effusion, and previous surgery. Becvarovski and Kartush6 reported that smoking is a risk factor not only for preoperative middle ear disease but also for long-term graft failure. They added smoking to the revised Middle Ear Risk Index.

Black7 reported the prognosis of 535 ossiculoplasties after an investigation of 5 types of factors: surgical, prosthetic, infection, tissue, and eustachian tube (the SPITE factors). He concluded that there were 12 prognostic factors, including (1) complex surgery, (2) requirement of major scutum repair plus myringoplasty, (3) absence of the malleus handle, (4) absence of the stapes superstructure, (5) a 50-dB air-bone gap, (6) unremitting otorrhea, (7) chronic myringitis, (8) the general condition of the patient, (9) meatoplasty involving the tympanic membrane, (10) presence of damaged or diseased mucosa, (11) presence of effusion, and (12) severe pars tensa collapse. However, the author performed only univariate analysis using the χ2 test.

Many factors can affect outcomes after ossiculoplasty. Therefore, multivariate analysis should be preferred. For example, in this series, primary surgery and use of a 1-stage operation were significant predictive factors in univariate analysis but were no longer significant in multivariate analysis. Table 4 demonstrates why use of a 1-stage operation dropped out on multivariate analysis. The stapes superstructure was present in 76.2% of patients undergoing a 1-stage operation but was present in only 23.8% of patients undergoing a 2-stage operation. Thus, there was a bias in the ratio of patients with the stapes superstructure present, which was a confounding factor between the operation type and hearing outcomes. To avoid such a confounding factor, multivariate analysis is recommended.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Distributions of 1- and 2-Stage Operations and Presence of Stapes Superstructure

Meanwhile, Mills,8 Albu et al,9 Dornhoffer and Gardner,10 and Yung and Vowler11 reported prognostic factors of ossiculoplasty using multivariate analysis. Mills8 reported that the loss of the stapes arch was a factor causing a significantly worse outcome, but only 55 ossiculoplasties were analyzed. Albu et al9 examined prognostic factors in 544 ossiculoplasties and concluded that the presence of the malleus handle and the mucosal status were the most important predictors in simple, granulating chronic otitis media and in the use of the canal wall-up technique in cholesteatoma. Dornhoffer and Gardner10 reported the prognostic factors of 200 ossiculoplasties and concluded that mucosal status, presence of the malleus handle, otorrhea, mastoidectomy, and revision surgery were significant prognostic factors. They advocated the Ossiculoplasty Outcome Parameter Staging index, which is a scoring system based on these factors. Yung and Vowler11 reported the long-term outcomes of 145 ossiculoplasties and concluded that the presence of the malleus handle was the only significant factor.

In our patient series, mucosal status and the presence of the stapes superstructure and the malleus handle were significant predictors, which is similar to most of the previous reports. Stapes mobility was also a significant predictor; stapes mobility is subjectively estimated by the surgeon during surgery but is very important for ossiculoplasty. We tried to remove granulation or calcification around the stapes superstructure to mobilize it. Performing stapes surgery in cases of tympanosclerotic stapes fixation has been controversial.1215 In this series, we performed only mobilization in such cases, not stapes surgery. Further study is necessary to determine how to deal with stapes showing deteriorated mobility. The merit of local anesthesia, which was also a significantly favorable predictor in our patients, is that hearing can be confirmed during surgery. If possible, local anesthesia should be recommended for patients with several poor prognostic factors. Further study is necessary to confirm whether our model shows good fit.

In conclusion, the presence of the stapes superstructure, malleus handle, and normal mucosa; normal stapes mobility; and the use of local anesthesia are significant predictive factors after performing multivariate analysis with logistic regression. Multivariate analysis is preferred for investigating prognostic factors of ossiculoplasty. Better knowledge of these predictive factors may contribute to the surgeon's judgment and the information given to patients.

Correspondence: Yasuo Mishiro, MD, Department of Otolaryngology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1, Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, Japan (ymishiro@hyo-med.ac.jp).

Submitted for Publication: January 7, 2009; final revision received March 21, 2009; accepted April 12, 2009.

Author Contributions: Drs Mishiro, Sakagami, and Kakutani had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Mishiro and Sakagami. Acquisition of data: Mishiro and Adachi. Analysis and interpretation of data: Mishiro and Kakutani. Drafting of the manuscript: Mishiro. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Sakagami, Adachi, and Kakutani. Statistical analysis: Mishiro and Kakutani. Administrative, technical, and material support: Mishiro and Adachi. Study supervision: Sakagami.

Financial Disclosure: None reported.

Luetje  CMDenninghoff  JS Perichondrial attached double cartilage block: a better alternative to PORP. Laryngoscope 1987;97 (9) 1106- 1108
PubMed Link to Article
American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, Inc, Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;113 (3) 186- 187
PubMed Link to Article
Bellucci  RJ Selection of cases and classification of tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1989;22 (5) 911- 926
PubMed
Austin  DF Reporting results in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 1985;6 (1) 85- 88
PubMed
Kartush  JM Ossicular chain construction: capitulum to malleus. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1994;27 (4) 689- 715
PubMed
Becvarovski  ZKartush  JM Smoking and tympanoplasty: implications for prognosis and the Middle Ear Risk Index (MERI). Laryngoscope 2001;111 (10) 1806- 1811
PubMed Link to Article
Black  B Ossiculoplasty prognosis: the SPITE method of assessment. Am J Otol 1992;13 (6) 544- 551
PubMed
Mills  RP The influence of pathological and technical variables on hearing results in ossiculoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1993;18 (3) 202- 205
PubMed Link to Article
Albu  SBabighian  GTrabalzini  F Prognostic factors in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 1998;19 (2) 136- 140
PubMed Link to Article
Dornhoffer  JLGardner  E Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty: a statistical staging system. Otol Neurotol 2001;22 (3) 299- 304
PubMed Link to Article
Yung  MVowler  SL Long-term results in ossiculoplasty: an analysis of prognostic factors. Otol Neurotol 2006;27 (6) 874- 881
PubMed Link to Article
Tos  MLau  TArndal  HPlate  S Tympanosclerosis of the middle ear: late results of surgical treatment. J Laryngol Otol 1990;104 (9) 685- 689
PubMed Link to Article
Teufert  KBDe La Cruz  A Tympanosclerosis: long-term hearing results after ossicular reconstruction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;126 (3) 264- 272
PubMed Link to Article
Kamal  SA Surgery of tympanosclerosis. J Laryngol Otol 1997;111 (10) 917- 923
PubMed Link to Article
Vincent  ROates  JSperling  NM Stapedotomy for tympanosclerotic stapes fixation: is it safe and efficient? a review of 68 cases. Otol Neurotol 2002;23 (6) 866- 872
PubMed Link to Article

Figures

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of 720 Patients Undergoing Ossiculoplasty
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Univariate Analysis of Short-term Hearing Outcomes After Ossiculoplasty in 720 Patients
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Multivariate Analysis Based on Short-term Hearing Outcomes After Ossiculoplasty in 720 Patients
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Distributions of 1- and 2-Stage Operations and Presence of Stapes Superstructure

References

Luetje  CMDenninghoff  JS Perichondrial attached double cartilage block: a better alternative to PORP. Laryngoscope 1987;97 (9) 1106- 1108
PubMed Link to Article
American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, Inc, Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;113 (3) 186- 187
PubMed Link to Article
Bellucci  RJ Selection of cases and classification of tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1989;22 (5) 911- 926
PubMed
Austin  DF Reporting results in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 1985;6 (1) 85- 88
PubMed
Kartush  JM Ossicular chain construction: capitulum to malleus. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1994;27 (4) 689- 715
PubMed
Becvarovski  ZKartush  JM Smoking and tympanoplasty: implications for prognosis and the Middle Ear Risk Index (MERI). Laryngoscope 2001;111 (10) 1806- 1811
PubMed Link to Article
Black  B Ossiculoplasty prognosis: the SPITE method of assessment. Am J Otol 1992;13 (6) 544- 551
PubMed
Mills  RP The influence of pathological and technical variables on hearing results in ossiculoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1993;18 (3) 202- 205
PubMed Link to Article
Albu  SBabighian  GTrabalzini  F Prognostic factors in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 1998;19 (2) 136- 140
PubMed Link to Article
Dornhoffer  JLGardner  E Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty: a statistical staging system. Otol Neurotol 2001;22 (3) 299- 304
PubMed Link to Article
Yung  MVowler  SL Long-term results in ossiculoplasty: an analysis of prognostic factors. Otol Neurotol 2006;27 (6) 874- 881
PubMed Link to Article
Tos  MLau  TArndal  HPlate  S Tympanosclerosis of the middle ear: late results of surgical treatment. J Laryngol Otol 1990;104 (9) 685- 689
PubMed Link to Article
Teufert  KBDe La Cruz  A Tympanosclerosis: long-term hearing results after ossicular reconstruction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;126 (3) 264- 272
PubMed Link to Article
Kamal  SA Surgery of tympanosclerosis. J Laryngol Otol 1997;111 (10) 917- 923
PubMed Link to Article
Vincent  ROates  JSperling  NM Stapedotomy for tympanosclerotic stapes fixation: is it safe and efficient? a review of 68 cases. Otol Neurotol 2002;23 (6) 866- 872
PubMed Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

624 Views
6 Citations
×

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
Strategies for Reducing the Risk of Bias

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
How Serious Is the Risk of Bias?