• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Audiologic and Surgical Outcomes in Endoscopic Revision Stapes Surgery

by Ashley M. Nassiri, MD, MBA, Robert J. Yawn, MD, Matthew M. Dedmon, MD, PhD, Anthony M. Tolisano, MD, Jacob B. Hunter, MD, Brandon Isaacson, MD, and Alejandro Rivas, MD • September 11, 2020

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Main Point

This case series describes the presentation, clinical course, and outcomes of six patients who underwent endoscopic revision stapes surgery. The results suggest that endoscopic revision stapes surgery is feasible and may provide a platform for a larger study to validate the efficacy of this approach with long-term outcomes. 

You Might Also Like

  • Bone Cement and Revision Stapedectomy
  • Bone Cement Superiority in Ossicular Chain Reconstruction/ Revision Stapes Surgery Not Supported by Evidence
  • Endoscopic Stapes Surgery Is a Valid Alternative to the Microscope
  • Flexible Ossicular Reconstruction Prosthesis Allows for Ease of Placement in Temporal Bone
Explore This Issue
September 2020

Introduction

When compared to primary stapes surgery, revision stapes surgery has been reported to result in less favorable surgical and audiologic outcomes, with an increased risk of postoperative sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) (Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:875–882). Due to the presence of altered anatomy, adhesions, and a previously manipulated oval window, revision stapes surgery is technically challenging. Prior studies have shown that the most common causes of failure after primary stapes surgery include prosthesis dislocation, short or long prosthesis, incus erosion or dislocation, perilymphatic fistula, and ankylosis of the lateral ossicular chain (Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:875–882. Otol Neurotol. 2011;32:373–383. Otol Neurotol. 2009;30:1092–1100. Otol Neurotol. 2006;27(suppl 2):S25–S47) The success of revision stapes surgery relies on intraoperative identification of the cause for initial surgical failure because a lack of diagnosis has been correlated with negative outcomes (Laryngoscope. 2018;128:2390–2396). Consequently, adequate visualization and evaluation of the ossicular chain and oval window are essential to accurately diagnose and treat the cause of failure.

An endoscopic approach to stapes surgery allows for enhanced visualization of the ossicular chain and oval window (Otol Neurotol. 2016;37:362–366. Laryngoscope. 2014;124:266–271. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2016;49:1215–1225. Otol Neurotol. 2018;39:1095–1101). Additionally, endoscopy of the middle ear has been especially useful in diagnosing ossicular malformations (Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273:1723–1729), perilymphatic fistulas (Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1994;514:63–65), and ossicular fixation (Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;96:21–24. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37:1071–1076).

Although prior studies have demonstrated similar audiologic and surgical outcomes between endoscopic and microscopic approaches for primary stapes surgery (Laryngoscope. 2014;124:266–271. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:662–666. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154:1093–1098), endoscopic outcomes for revision stapes surgery have not been previously reported. This case series describes the presentation, clinical course, and outcomes of six patients who underwent endoscopic revision stapes surgery. 

Preoperative Demographics and Intraoperative Findings

PatientAgeSexEarPrior
Stapes
Surgery (n)
Preoperative CT FindingsIntraoperative FindingsInterventionProsthesisPostoperative
Complications
147FL1Displaced prosthesisDisplaced prosthesisLaser stapedotomy, longer prosthesisNitinol piston-
263FL1-Missing prosthesis, Incus necrosisLaser stapedotomy, longer prosthesisNitinol piston (malleus to
fenestra)
-
382FL1Normal prosthesis positioningDisplaced prosthesis, prolapsed facial nerveLaser stapedotomy, longer prosthesisNitinol pistonTemporary dysgeusia
419FL1-Short prosthesis without incus contactLaser stapedotomy,
longer prosthesis
Nitinol piston-
557MR3-Displaced prosthesis, malleus fixation, incus necrosisLaser stapedectomy, longer prosthesisTitanium bucket handle-
651ML1Displaced prosthesis onlyDisplaced prosthesis, oval and round window otosclerosisStapedectomy, oval window drill-outTitanium bucket handleLabyrinthitis resolved with steroids
CT = computed tomography; F = female; L = left.

CT = computed tomography; F = female; L = left.

Methods

Following institutional review board (IRB) approval (IRB 171214, 022012-060.2), a retrospective chart review was performed of all adult patients who underwent endoscopic stapes surgery at two tertiary care otologic centers between 2014 and 2017. Patients who had a history of prior stapes surgery who underwent totally endoscopic revision stapes surgery were included in the study (three patients from each institution).

Patient demographics, clinical course, and audiologic data—including unaided air conduction thresholds, bone conduction (BC) thresholds, and speech discrimination scores—were recorded from the medical record. For each case, the cause of surgical failure was identified intraoperatively. Postoperative outcome variables included postoperative complications, prosthesis extrusion, dysgeusia, and tympanic membrane (TM) retraction or perforation. All patients had preoperative and at least six weeks of postoperative audiologic data. Audiometric testing and calculations were conducted as previously described (Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154:1093–1098). Audiometric data herein are presented according to the 1995 American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery consensus guidelines. Postoperative SNHL was defined as an increase in average unaided BC thresholds (at 500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, and 4000 Hz) > 15 dB HL.4

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, How I Do It Tagged With: clinical ourcomes, clinical researchIssue: September 2020

You Might Also Like:

  • Bone Cement and Revision Stapedectomy
  • Bone Cement Superiority in Ossicular Chain Reconstruction/ Revision Stapes Surgery Not Supported by Evidence
  • Endoscopic Stapes Surgery Is a Valid Alternative to the Microscope
  • Flexible Ossicular Reconstruction Prosthesis Allows for Ease of Placement in Temporal Bone

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Have you invented or patented something that betters the field of otolaryngology?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Physician Handwriting: A Potentially Powerful Healing Tool

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Otolaryngologists as Entrepreneurs: Transforming Patient Care And Practice

    • Keeping Watch for Skin Cancers on the Head and Neck

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Physician Handwriting: A Potentially Powerful Healing Tool
    • Leaky Pipes—Time to Focus on Our Foundations
    • You Are Among Friends: The Value Of Being In A Group
    • How To: Full Endoscopic Procedures of Total Parotidectomy
    • How To: Does Intralesional Steroid Injection Effectively Mitigate Vocal Fold Scarring in a Rabbit Model?

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939