Search

Background: Acquired anterior glottic web poses a significant challenge to laryngologists given its propensity to recur following treatment, and there are a wide variety of described techniques. Methods: A systematic review of the medical literature was undertaken in order to identify all articles pertaining to the management of acquired anterior glottic web. Results: Thirteen studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and analysed. All were retrospective series, with varying surgical techniques and outcome measures. Only two studies reported on the use of topical mitomycin C. Conclusion: Mucosal graft techniques and keel placement appear to improve success rates, but both carry risks and disadvantages. Based on the available evidence, the use of topical agents such as mitomycin C cannot be recommended in the management of acquired anterior glottic web. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Early diagnosis in acoustic neuroma (AN) has increased the prevalence of small tumors with good hearing. Otoneurological centres have increasingly aimed to preserve hearing function. The managementoptions of small ANs range from observation to active treatments (surgery, radiotherapy). No firm agreement has been made on which is the best option for audiological function preservation. Nowadays, no definitive guidelines are present in order to suggest a standard way of evaluating and comparing the hearing quality. The lack of a universally agreed hearing classification leads to the impossibility of comparing data from different centres or different therapeutic options. Method: The paper wantst o show, analyzing our surgical experience in hearing preservation surgery for ANs, the different results that are demonstrable by just using different hearing classification. Results: About the 13 patients considered 'in protocol' who underwent HPS, 69% are considered to have 'good' hearing after surgery using the Tokyo or Sanna classifications; with the AAO-HNS or the GR classifications the outcome of 'good' hearing preservation was 77% and in 87% with the WRS classification. Conclusion: A shared hearing classification is potentially the solution in order to facilitate comparison of functional outcomes across different centres or different treatment modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]