Mitomycin C-associated radiofrequency microelectrocautery used in myringotomy in an animal model.

Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2009 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 3342

Study snapshot

PublicationBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2009

Study typeanimal

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This study aimed at describing an alternative surgical technique to the insertion of a ventilation tube in the tympanic membrane: myringotomy by radiofrequency alone and associated with mitomycin C. AIM: to show a surgical approach that can be simple to execute, not subject to complications arising from the ventilation tube. MATERIALS AND METHODS: we compared myringotomy by microknife and by radiofrequency microcautery (0.3 mm and 0.7 mm tips) alone and associated with mitomycin C, considering the time of tympanic closure in Wistar rats. Experimental study. RESULTS: there was a statistically significant difference between radiofrequency myringotomy and knife myringotomy. As we analyze the radiofrequency approach with the 0.7 mm tip associated with mitomycin C (Wilcoxon test), the p value found was lower than 0.001, showing a statistical significance. The maximum tympanic membrane closure time was 44 days and the median found was 14 days. CONCLUSION: the radiofrequency myringotomy (with the larger diameter tip) associated with mitomycin C enhances the tympanic membrane healing time.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeanimal

Effect directionmixed

PopulationWistar rats

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureNot supplied

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In Wistar rats, tympanic membrane closure time differed significantly between radiofrequency myringotomy and knife myringotomy. Radiofrequency myringotomy using a 0.7 mm tip combined with mitomycin C showed a statistically significant effect (p<0.001), with a maximum closure time of 44 days and a median of 14 days; the authors conclude this approach increases healing/closure time.

Outcomes measured

time of tympanic membrane closure/healing time after myringotomy

Limitations

Sample size not reported in abstract
Radiofrequency exposure parameters (frequency, power, dosimetry) not reported
Animal model; clinical applicability to humans not established in abstract
Comparative groups and effect sizes not fully described in abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "radiofrequency microelectrocautery",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Wistar rats",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "time of tympanic membrane closure/healing time after myringotomy"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In Wistar rats, tympanic membrane closure time differed significantly between radiofrequency myringotomy and knife myringotomy. Radiofrequency myringotomy using a 0.7 mm tip combined with mitomycin C showed a statistically significant effect (p<0.001), with a maximum closure time of 44 days and a median of 14 days; the authors conclude this approach increases healing/closure time.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "Radiofrequency exposure parameters (frequency, power, dosimetry) not reported",
    "Animal model; clinical applicability to humans not established in abstract",
    "Comparative groups and effect sizes not fully described in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "myringotomy",
    "radiofrequency",
    "microelectrocautery",
    "mitomycin C",
    "tympanic membrane",
    "Wistar rats",
    "healing time",
    "closure time"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1016/s1808-8694(15)30548-6
PubMed: 20209286

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library