The effect of drill-generated noise in the contralateral healthy ear following mastoid surgery: The emphasis on hearing threshold recovery time

Mohammad Hossein Baradaranfar, Honeyeh Shahbazian, Nasim Behniafard, Saeid Atighechi, Mohammad Hossein Dadgarnia, Abbas Mirvakili, Abolfazl Mollasadeghi, Amin Baradaranfar, Mohammad Hossein Baradaranfar, Honeyeh Shahbazian, Nasim Behniafard, Saeid Atighechi, Mohammad Hossein Dadgarnia, Abbas Mirvakili, Abolfazl Mollasadeghi, Amin Baradaranfar

Abstract

In mastoid surgeries, contralateral ear noise exposure is a known, identified factor leading to high-frequency hearing loss due to the wide variety of surgical devices that may be used during the surgery. However, the hearing threshold recovery time after this trauma was uncertain. The present study aimed to assess this time. In this prospective survival analysis study, 28 consecutive patients with chronic otitis media who were undergoing tympanomastoidectomy were assessed. Standard pure-tone audiometry (PTA) and distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) were measured in all contralateral ears before and 6 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 96 h after the surgery. Based on the PTA postoperative hearing loss, survival rates at frequencies of 3000 Hz, 4000 Hz, 6000 Hz, and 8000 Hz were 44.4%, 36.4%, 51.7%, and 47.4%, 24 h after surgery; 11.1%, 9.1%, 10.3%, and 13.2%, 48 h after surgery; and 0%, 0%, 3.4%, and 2.6%, 72 h after surgery, respectively. Based on the PTA and DPOAE, survival rates at all frequencies were 0%, 96 h after the surgery. According to the PTA, mean hearing recovery times were 61.98 ± 26.76 h (3000 Hz), 62.73 ± 26.50 h (4000 Hz), 67.08 ± 25.90 h (6000 Hz), 70.70 ± 24.13 h (8000 Hz), and with regard to DPOAE the recovery times were 58.58 ± 28.39 h (2000 Hz), 63.32 ± 28.83 h (4000 Hz), 65.22 ± 29.13 h (6000 Hz), and 75.14 ± 22.70 h (8000 Hz), respectively. To conclude, high-frequency hearing loss usually occurs following mastoid surgeries that is mainly temporary and reversible after 72 h.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Hearing levels at 250 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 2
Figure 2
Hearing levels at 500 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Hearing levels at 1000 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 4
Figure 4
Hearing level DPOAE amplitudes in 500 Hz according to different times after the surgery
Figure 5
Figure 5
Hearing level DPOAE amplitudes in 1000 Hz according to different times after the surgery
Figure 6
Figure 6
Hearing levels at 3000 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 7
Figure 7
Hearing levels at 4000 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 8
Figure 8
Hearing levels at 6000 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 9
Figure 9
Hearing levels at 8000 Hz according to different times after the surgery (PTA)
Figure 10
Figure 10
Hearing level DPOAE amplitudes in 2000 Hz according to different times after the surgery
Figure 11
Figure 11
Hearing level DPOAE amplitudes in 4000 Hz according to different times after the surgery
Figure 12
Figure 12
Hearing level DPOAE amplitudes in 6000 Hz according to different times after the surgery
Figure 13
Figure 13
Hearing level DPOAE amplitudes in 8000 Hz according to different times after the surgery

References

    1. Kylén P, Stjernvall JE, Arlinger S. Variables affecting the drill-generated noise levels in ear surgery. Acta Otolaryngol. 1977;84:252–9.
    1. Strömberg AK, Yin X, Olofsson A, Duan M. Evaluation of the usefulness of a silicone tube connected to a microphone in monitoring noise levels induced by drilling during mastoidectomy and cochleostomy. Acta Otolaryngol. 2010;130:1163–8.
    1. Man A, Winerman I. Does drill noise during mastoid surgery affect the contralateral ear? Am J Otol. 1985;6:334–5.
    1. Farzanegan G, Ghasemi M, Panahi F, Raza M, Alghasi M. Does drill-induced noise have an impact on sensorineural hearing during craniotomy procedure? Br J Neurosurg. 2010;24:40–5.
    1. Kylén P, Arlinger S. Drill-generated noise levels in ear surgery. Acta Otolaryngol. 1976;82:402–9.
    1. Michaelides EM, Kartush JM. Implications of sound levels generated by otologic devices. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;125:361–3.
    1. da Cruz MJ, Fagan P, Atlas M, McNeill C. Drill-induced hearing loss in the nonoperated ear. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117:555–8.
    1. Doménech J, Carulla M, Traserra J. Sensorineural high-frequency hearing loss after drill-generated acoustic trauma in tympanoplasty. Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1989;246:280–2.
    1. Huttenbrink KB. Cochlear damage caused by middle ear surgeries. Laryngorhinootologie. 1991;70:66–71.
    1. Urquhart AC, McIntosh WA, Bodenstein NP. Drill-generated sensorineural hearing loss following mastoid surgery. Laryngoscope. 1992;102:689–92.
    1. Tos 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;103:845–9.
    1. Soudijn ER, Bleeker JD, Hoeksema PE, Molenaar I, van Rooyen JP, Ritsma RJ. Scanning electron microscopic study of the organ of Corti in normal and sound-damaged guinea pigs. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1976;85(Suppl 29):1–58.
    1. Phillips JI, Heyns PS, Nelson G. Rock drills used in South African mines: A comparative study of noise and vibration levels. Ann Occup Hyg. 2007;51:305–10.
    1. Holmquist J, Oleander R, Hallén O. Peroperative drill-generated noise levels in ear surgery. Acta Otolaryngol. 1979;87:458–60.
    1. Schuknecht HF, Tonndorf J. Acoustic trauma of the coch ea from ear surgery. Laryngoscope. 1960;70:479–505.
    1. Lustig LR, Jackler RK, Chen DA. Contralateral hearing loss after neurotologic surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;113:276–82.
    1. Ugur KS, Erpolat S, Kurtaran H, Ark N, Sarifakioglu E, Gunduz M. The effects of oral isotretinoin (13-Cis retinoic acid) on the inner ear: A clinical study. Int Adv Otol. 2005;8:339–44.
    1. Migirov L, Wolf M. Influence of drilling on the distortion product otoacoustic emissions in the non-operated ear. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2009;71:153–6.
    1. Karatas E, Miman MC, Ozturan O, Erdem T, Kalcioglu MT. Contralateral normal ear after mastoid surgery: Evaluation by otoacoustic emissions (mastoid drilling and hearing loss) ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2007;69:18–24.
    1. Roeser RJ, Clark JL. Pure tone tests. In: Brandenburg B, editor. Audiology Diagnosis. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers Inc; 2007. pp. 252–3.
    1. Mehrparvar AH, Mirmohammadi SJ, Davari MH, Mostaghaci M, Mollasadeghi A, Bahaloo M, et al. Conventional audiometry, extended high-frequency audiometry, and DPOAE for early diagnosis of NIHL. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2014;16:e9628.
    1. Baradarnfar MH, Karamifar K, Mehrparvar AH, Mollasadeghi A, Gharavi M, Karimi G, et al. Amplitude changes in otoacoustic emissions after exposure to industrial noise. Noise Health. 2012;14:28–31.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever