Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:59:28.324Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of mastoid drilling on hearing of the contralateral ear

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2013

A Goyal ,
P P Singh  and
A Vashishth
A Goyal*
Affiliation:
Department of ENT and Head and Neck Surgery, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, New Delhi, India
P P Singh
Affiliation:
Department of ENT and Head and Neck Surgery, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, New Delhi, India
A Vashishth
Affiliation:
Department of ENT and Head and Neck Surgery, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
*
Address for correspondence: Prof. Arun Goyal, Department of ENT and Head and Neck Surgery, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Delhi 110 095, India E-mail: arungoyal150@yahoo.co.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

This study aimed to: understand the effect that high intensity noise associated with drilling (during otological surgery) has on hearing in the contralateral ear; determine the nature of hearing loss, if any, by establishing whether it is temporary or persistent; and examine the association between hearing loss and various drill parameters.

Methods:

A prospective clinical study was carried out at a tertiary centre. Thirty patients with unilateral cholesteatoma and normal contralateral hearing were included. Patients were evaluated pre-operatively and for five days following surgery using high frequency pure tone audiometry, and low and high frequency transient evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emission testing.

Results:

The findings revealed statistically significant changes in distortion product otoacoustic emissions at high frequencies (p = 0.016), and in transient evoked otoacoustic emissions at both low and high frequencies (p = 0.035 and 0.021, respectively). There was a higher statistical association between otoacoustic emission changes and cutting burrs compared with diamond burrs.

Conclusion:

Drilling during mastoid surgery poses a threat to hearing in the contralateral ear due to noise and vibration conducted transcranially.

Keywords

Hearing Loss, Noise-InducedMastoidEar, InnerTrauma
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 127 , Issue 10 , October 2013 , pp. 952 - 956
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented orally at the American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery Annual Meeting, 26–29 September 2010, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

References

1Eddins, AC, Zuskov, M, Salvi, RJ. Changes in distortion product otoacoustic emissions during prolonged noise exposure. Hear Res 1999;127:119–28CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Da Cruz, MJ, Fagan, P, Atlas, M, McNeill, C. Drill-induced hearing loss in the nonoperated ear. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;117:555–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Tos, M, Lau, T, Plate, S. Sensorineural hearing loss following chronic ear surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1984;93:403–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Zou, J, Bretlau, P, Pyykkö, I. Sensorineural hearing loss after vibration: an animal model for evaluating prevention and treatment of inner ear hearing loss. Acta Otolaryngol 2001;121:143–8Google ScholarPubMed
5Pyykkö, I, Färkkilä, M, Toivanen, J, Korhonen, O, Hyvärinen, J. Transmission of vibration in the hand-arm system with special reference to changes in compression force and acceleration. Scand J Work Environ Health 1976;2:87–95CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Kylen, P, Stjernvall, JE, Arlinger, S. Variables affecting the drill-generated noise levels in ear surgery. Acta Otolaryngol 1977;84:252–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Urquhart, AC, McIntosh, WA, Bodenstein, NP. Drill-generated sensorineural hearing loss following mastoid surgery. Laryngoscope 1992;102:689–92CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8Hegewald, M, Heitman, R, Weiderhold, ML. High-frequency electrostimulation hearing after mastoidectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989;100:49–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Kylen, P, Arlinger, SD, Bergholtz, LM. Perioperative temporary threshold shift in ear surgery. An electrocochleographic study. Acta Otolaryngol 1977;84:393–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Karatas, E, Miman, MC, Ozturan, O, Erdem, T, Kalciglu, MT. Contralateral normal ear after mastoid surgery: evaluation by otoacoustic emissions (mastoid drilling and hearing loss). ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2007;69:18–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Pye, A, Ulehlova, L. A comparison of initial and permanent surface changes to guinea pig hair cells after plastic acoustic overstimulation. Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1989;246:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Stockwell, CW, Ades, HW, Engstrom, H. Pattern of hair cell damage after intense auditory stimulation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1969;78:1144–68CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Kylen, P, Arlinger, S. Drill-generated noise levels in ear surgery. Acta Otolaryngol 1976;82:402–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Flottorp, G. Effects of noise upon the upper frequency limit of hearing. Acta Otolaryngol 1973;75:329–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Johnsson, LG, Hawkins, JE. Degeneration patterns in human ears exposed to noise. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1976;85:725–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Hamernik, RP, Turrentine, G, Roberto, M, Salvi, R, Henderson, D. Anatomical correlates of impulse noise-induced mechanical damage in the cochlea. Hear Res 1984;13:229–48CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Tos, M, Trojaborg, N, Thomsen, J. The contralateral ear after translabyrinthine removal of acoustic neuromas: is there a drill noise generated hearing loss? J Laryngol Otol 1989;103:845–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar