Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic agent widely used in several surgical procedures to reduce intraoperative bleeding. Intraoperative bleeding is a crucial problem for the ear surgeon, as it prevents good visualization of the surgical field. The aim of this work was to analyze the relevant literature about the use of tranexamic acid in ear surgery. A literature search was conducted in agreement with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement, across 3 databases (Medline, Cochrane, and Google Scholar), with the terms \"tranexamic acid,\" and \"ear,\" and \"surgery.\" Three prospective, randomized, and double-blind clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. Studies were not able to be pooled because of heterogeneity in material, methods of delivery and evaluation, and procedures used. Despite these limitations, all 3 papers found a significant reduction in intraoperative bleeding, allowing a better visualization of the operating field. Despite the scarcity of published trials, tranexamic acid is safe and seems to be useful in reducing intraoperative bleeding in ear surgery, thus improving operative field visualization.

OBJECTIVE: Iatrogenic facial nerve palsy following otological surgery is a devastating complication that results in adverse aesthetic and functional outcomes. This study aims to review studies that have reported cases of immediate facial nerve palsy to learn why and where injuries occurred and to assess outcomes following management.
UNASSIGNED: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Pubmed up to June 20, 2023.
METHODS: Clinical studies of immediate facial nerve palsies following middle ear and cochlear implantation surgery were included. Risk of bias was examined using the Brazzelli risk of bias tool. Due to the inconsistency in reporting of outcomes, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Of 234 studies identified, 11 met the inclusion criteria. The most common causes of injury were excessive drilling, use of sharp hooks to remove disease, or disorientation of the surgeon secondary to bleeding or inflammation. Variable usage of preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging and intraoperative facial nerve monitoring was reported. The tympanic segment was the most common site of injury. A variety of surgical techniques were employed to approach the facial nerve injury including facial nerve decompression, direct closure, and repair using an autologous nerve graft.
CONCLUSIONS: Otological surgeons should consider utilizing preoperative CT imaging to establish a three-dimensional mental image of key landmarks and anatomical variations before embarking on surgery. Intraoperative FN monitoring enables safe practice. Despite these measures, complex disease processes and hostile intraoperative conditions can present difficulty. Multiple treatment options are available to treat the underlying injury.

OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize reported adverse events related to the use of porcine small intestine submucosal grafts (Biodesign™) in otologic procedures.
METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis.
METHODS: Food and Drug Administration\'s Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database.
METHODS: The MAUDE database was queried for all medical device reports (MDR) related to otologic use of Biodesign™ (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) from January 2016 to November 2022. Adverse events (AEs) were identified by reviewing all reports with the basic search term \"Biodesign\" and \"Biodesign, Otologic\". Reports were individually reviewed and categorized with special attention to AEs.
RESULTS: A total of 500 reports were reviewed. Since FDA approval of Biodesign™ in 2016, there have been 5 adverse events reported for use of Biodesign™ during otologic surgery (tympanoplasty, n = 3; stapes surgery, n = 2). All reported events described patient injury, and all cases required at least one revision surgery. Four cases described significant foreign body inflammatory reactions. Complications included hearing loss (n = 3), severe otalgia (n = 2), persistent perforation (n = 2), vertigo (n = 2), and facial paralysis (n = 1).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of porcine small intestinal submucosal graft has been thought to be a safe and effective option for otologic surgery, with the advantage of availability without graft harvest in minimally invasive endoscopic surgery. However, foreign body or granulomatous reactions have been documented and should be considered prior to its use in otologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Microsurgical operations such as middle ear surgery rely heavily on visibility of the surgical field. Anesthetic techniques such as controlled hypotension have been developed to improve surgical field visibility by attempting to decrease bleeding. Many agents have been utilized to achieve controlled hypotension intraoperatively. Dexmedetomidine is a relatively newer agent which works on alpha-2 receptors to decrease sympathetic tone. This paper sought to determine the efficacy of dexmedetomidine for optimizing surgical field visibility in MES.
METHODS: A comprehensive search strategy was used in PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and CENTRAL through August 9, 2022 for this systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: adult patients undergoing middle ear surgery with dexmedetomidine used for controlled hypotension to improve surgical field visibility. Risk of bias was assessed via Cochrane RoB 2. Meta-analysis of mean difference for surgical field scores and risk ratios for positive surgical field scores were used to compare dexmedetomidine with placebo or other agents.
RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in this review. Statistically significant mean difference was found to favor dexmedetomidine over placebo for Fromme-Boezaart surgical field scores. Statistically significant results were also demonstrated favoring dexmedetomidine over other agents in risk ratio for receiving positive surgical field scores, as well as surgeon and patient satisfaction scores.
CONCLUSIONS: Controlled hypotension is an invaluable tool for surgical field visibility. Improved surgical field visibility was observed with dexmedetomidine compared with placebo and various other agents. Risk of sub-optimal bleeding scores was significantly lower with dexmedetomidine. Dexmedetomidine is effective at improving surgical field visibility in middle ear surgery.

Despite the increasing popularity of Endoscopic Ear Surgery (EES), there is a lack of evidence to guide trainees as they introduce EES into practice. This review aims to evaluate training in EES including the optimal introductory procedures, methods of training, the learning curve, and the determination of competency in EES. In addition, this review seeks to identify any areas falling within these themes requiring further clarification.
A database search of Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was conducted in June 2022. Original articles, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses reporting on training in EES, introduction into practice, learning curves, and competency assessment were included.
A scoping review was carried out in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and reported according to PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews. A qualitative assessment of results grouped thematically was performed.
Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, with 24 rating as \"fair\" or \"good\" on quality assessment. Surgical simulation was the most frequently described method of training as utilized in 11 studies. The most suggested introductory procedure was tympanoplasty which was advocated for in five studies. Heterogeneity existed in the outcomes and methodologies used to measure EES learning curves, with an overreliance on surgical times. No robust definition of competency in EES procedures exists at present.
Surgical simulation appears to be a beneficial training methodology for EES. However, there is a marked lack of objective data to describe the optimal introductory procedures or assessment of competency in EES. Laryngoscope, 133:3269-3278, 2023.

Iatrogenic injury to the chorda tympani (CT) is a well recognized, although potentially underestimated, consequence of stapes surgery. This study aims to review the currently available literature to determine the incidence and prognosis of taste disturbances in these patients.
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases.
Databases were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Search terms included (chorda tympani OR gustatory OR taste OR chemosensory OR dysgeusia OR nervus intermedius) AND (ear surgery OR middle ear OR stapes OR stapedectomy OR stapedotomy). Patients with prospective data collection including preoperative data were further divided by methodology into \"objective\" and \"subjective\" assessments of taste dysfunction. A systematic review was performed for all included studies, with meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used for those with comparable methodology and patient populations.
Initial search yielded 2,959 articles that were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Once duplicates were removed, seven studies were identified, representing 173 patients with subjective testing (all seven studies) and 146 with objective testing (five studies). Eighty of 173 patients (46.2%) noted a disturbance in taste at early follow-up, whereas as 26 of 173 (15.0%) noted long-term problems. Objective methodology and result reporting were heterogenous and not amenable to pooled meta-analysis for all studies included.
Changes in taste occur relatively frequently after stapedectomy. Surgeons should continue to counsel prospective patients as to the risks of both short- and long-term taste disturbances.

BACKGROUND: The piezoelectric instrument (PEI) offers a novel technique for bone removal in ear surgery with a combination of micro-oscillation and cavitation. The aim of this review is to explore the advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of this instrument in comparison to the drill.
METHODS: We conducted a search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations. The primary selection included all studies reporting on the use of PEI in ear surgery or its effect on the inner ear. Only studies with a control group were included in the secondary selection.
RESULTS: The first search identified 49 studies between 2003 and 2022. These reported on a total of 1162 ear operations, during which PEI was used for various indications. Most data were based on uncontrolled retrospective studies or case reports (76%). Only one of the five controlled clinical studies was prospective and randomized. The advantages of PEI weighed against its limitations and disadvantages were critically analyzed in comparison to the drill.
CONCLUSIONS: Piezoelectric surgery is an innovative and promising surgical technique in the temporal bone. PEI appears to enable safer and more precise bone removal in close proximity to soft tissue when compared to the drill. The slower bone removal and cost factors represent current limitations to its wider use in ear surgery.

BACKGROUND: The piezoelectric instrument (PEI) offers a novel technique for bone removal in ear surgery with a combination of micro-oscillation and cavitation. The aim of this review is to explore the advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of this instrument in comparison to the drill.
METHODS: We conducted a search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations. The primary selection included all studies reporting on the use of PEI in ear surgery or its effect on the inner ear. Only studies with a control group were included in the secondary selection.
RESULTS: The first search identified 49 studies between 2003 and 2022. These reported on a total of 1162 ear operations, during which PEI was used for various indications. Most data were based on uncontrolled retrospective studies or case reports (76%). Only one of the five controlled clinical studies was prospective and randomized. The advantages of PEI weighed against its limitations and disadvantages were critically analyzed in comparison to the drill.
CONCLUSIONS: Piezoelectric surgery is an innovative and promising surgical technique in the temporal bone. PEI appears to enable safer and more precise bone removal in close proximity to soft tissue when compared to the drill. The slower bone removal and cost factors represent current limitations to its wider use in ear surgery.
UNASSIGNED: HINTERGRUND: Durch die Kombination aus Mikrooszillationen und Kavitation bietet das piezoelektrische Instrument (PEI) eine für die Ohrchirurgie neuartige Technologie zur Knochenabtragung. Das Ziel dieser Übersichtstudie ist, die Vorteile, Nachteile und Limitationen solcher Instrumente im Vergleich mit dem Bohrer zu ermitteln.
METHODS: Die Literaturrecherche in PubMed/MEDLINE und Google Scholar erfolgte entsprechend den PRISMA-Empfehlungen. Die primäre Selektion umfasste alle Studien, die über eine Anwendung von PEI in der Ohrchirurgie oder über dessen Auswirkung auf das Innenohr berichteten. In der sekundären Selektion wurden nur Studien mit einer Kontrollgruppe eingeschlossen.
UNASSIGNED: In der primären Selektion wurden 49 Studien von 2003 bis 2022 identifiziert. Diese berichteten über 1162 Ohroperationen, die mit PEI für unterschiedliche Indikationen durchgeführt wurden. Die Datenlage basiert vorwiegend auf nicht kontrollierten retrospektiven Studien oder Kasuistiken (76 %). Nur eine von den fünf kontrollierten klinischen Studien ist prospektiv randomisiert. Die Vorteile des PEI werden kritisch gegenüber seinen Limitationen und Nachteilen im Vergleich mit dem Bohrer analysiert.
UNASSIGNED: Die piezoelektrische Chirurgie ist eine innovative und vielversprechende operative Technik im Bereich des Felsenbeins. Das PEI scheint eine präzisere und sichere Knochenabtragung an der Weichteilgrenze als der traditionelle Bohrer zu ermöglichen. Die langsamere Knochenabtragung sowie wirtschaftliche Faktoren sind aktuell Limitationen für seine breite Anwendung in der Ohrchirurgie.

The aim of this systematic scoping review is to explore the literature on root fenestration prevalence and its possible etiologic, aggravating and predisposing clinical factors. A systematic search was conducted in 5 electronic databases, by two independent reviewers, without any language and date restrictions. Forty-six full-text records were included in the study, out of which 27 were used for prevalence analysis and 42 for clinical factor analysis. The results suggest that the literature is heterogenous, with major differences in the study protocols and results\' presentation, providing limited information regarding root fenestration prevalence and possible racial distribution patterns. Further documentation is also required regarding clinical parameters that may affect root fenestration\'s presence and severity. Despite their few limitations, retrospective cone beam computed tomography studies with high-resolution protocols, as well as open flap studies for direct observation of possible root fenestration sites, seem the most reliable methods to better comprehend its presence and possible distribution patterns.

OBJECTIVE: Transcanal endoscopic ear surgery is hypothesized to result in less postoperative pain when compared to nonendoscopic techniques due to its minimally invasive nature. In this systematic literature review, we aim to summarize and evaluate the evidence surrounding postoperative pain control and analgesic utilization after transcanal endoscopic ear surgery.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using standardized methodology. Computerized and manual searches were performed to identify studies that evaluated postoperative pain outcomes following endoscopic ear surgery. Only studies that met predetermined criteria were selected and evaluated for quality and bias. Extracted data included demographics, pain scores, analgesic administered as well as the diagnosis and type of surgery undertaken. Exclusion criteria included letters/commentaries and reviews, lack of pain outcome data and studies not concerning endoscopic ear surgery.
RESULTS: The systematic literature review included 24 studies. Seven were RCTs, 10 were prospective and 7 were retrospective observational studies. A total of 1859 patients were evaluated for surgical approach and postoperative pain levels and analgesic use. Due to the lack of sufficient reporting of the data, a meta-analysis was not applicable. In the qualitative synthesis for the primary outcome, weighted pooled analysis showed that there was a slight reduction in postoperative pain after transcanal endoscopic ear surgery. Based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool, the quality for the finding is low.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a small reduction in postoperative pain after transcanal endoscopic ear surgery when compared to nonendoscopic approaches, however, the clinical significance of this reduction is unclear. The evidence was from studies of only low to moderate quality.