Facial Nerve Outcome after XXXX Resection: A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic versus Open Retrosigmoid Approach.

@entity1 @entity5513 @entity5 @entity281 @entity158
The minimal access retrosigmoid endoscopic approach to @entity5513 ( @entity5513 ) resection has been used with promising results. However, it has not been compared with the standard open approach in the literature. We performed a meta-analysis review for all articles describing both approaches for @entity5513 from 1996 to 2011. We found 1861 articles. After review and discussion, we narrowed our study to 25 articles, 4 endoscopic and 21 open. The total number of @entity1 was 3026 for open and 790 for endoscopic. The mean @entity5 sizes in the open and endoscopic series were 2.5 cm and 2.7 cm, respectively. Good facial nerve outcome was achieved in 67% of the open series @entity1 and in 94% of the endoscopic series @entity1 . Other outcomes in the open and endoscopic series were the following: gross total resection, 91% versus 97%; functional hearing, 22.6% versus 46%; wound @entity281 , 1.3% versus 2.6%; and recurrence, 5.4% versus 2.2%. We acknowledge the limitations of our study, but we can state that the endoscopic approach is not inferior to the standard open approach. In expert hands the endoscopic approach can offer as good a result as the open, with potential benefits such as @entity158 and a shorter length of stay in the hospital. There is a need for more controlled studies for a definitive comparison.
