Copyright 2001 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.2001
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on our recent publication, "Facial Function in Hearing Preservation: Acoustic Neuroma Surgery." There was not a significant difference in facial function between hearing preservation approaches (combined patients with middle fossa and retrosigmoid procedures vs translabyrinthine procedures) at any of the 3 time intervals (immediate, discharge, and final). For purposes of clarity, we did not include the detailed statistical analysis of grouping the 2 hearing preservation approaches vs considering them separately in comparison with translabyrinthine surgery. Our focus in this study was to determine whether facial function following hearing preservation surgery was inferior to that of translabyrinthine surgery as a basis for selecting surgical strategy. As discussed in the article, our indications for retrosigmoid surgery were restrictive and the total number of such procedures was low. Accordingly, we considered the grouped analysis most relevant as the statistical comparison for our discussion and conclusion.
Arriaga MA, Chen DA. In Reply. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(12):1518–1519. doi:
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: