A prospective randomized trial of adenoidectomy vs grommet insertion in the treatment of glue ear

Ventilation tubes (grommets) for otitis media with effusion (OME) in children

BACKGROUND

Otitis media with effusion (OME) is an accumulation of fluid in the middle ear cavity, common amongst young children. It may cause hearing loss which, when persistent, may lead to developmental delay, social difficulty and poor quality of life. Management includes watchful waiting, autoinflation, medical and surgical treatment. Insertion of ventilation tubes has often been used as the preferred treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of ventilation tubes (grommets) for OME in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane ENT Register, CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials on 20 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in children (6 months to 12 years) with OME for ≥ 3 months. We included studies that compared ventilation tube (VT) insertion with five comparators: no treatment, watchful waiting (ventilation tubes inserted later, if required), myringotomy, hearing aids and other non-surgical treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were determined following a multi-stakeholder prioritisation exercise and were: 1) hearing; 2) OME-specific quality of life; 3) persistent tympanic membrane perforation (as a severe adverse effect of the surgery). Secondary outcomes were: 1) persistence of OME; 2) other adverse effects (including tympanosclerosis, VT blockage and pain); 3) receptive language skills; 4) speech development; 5) cognitive development; 6) psychosocial skills; 7) listening skills; 8) generic health-related quality of life; 9) parental stress; 10) vestibular function; 11) episodes of acute otitis media. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for key outcomes. Although we included all measures of hearing assessment, the proportion of children who returned to normal hearing was our preferred method, due to challenges in interpreting the results of mean hearing thresholds.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs (2888 children). We considered most of the evidence to be very uncertain, due to wide confidence intervals for the effect estimates, few participants, and a risk of performance and detection bias. Here we report our key outcomes at the longest reported follow-up. There were some limitations to the evidence. No studies investigated the comparison of ventilation tubes versus hearing aids. We did not identify any data on disease-specific quality of life; however, many studies were conducted before the development of specific tools to assess this in otitis media. Short-acting ventilation tubes were used in most studies and thus specific data on the use of long-acting VTs is limited. Finally, we did not identify specific data on the effects of VTs in children at increased risk of OME (e.g. with craniofacial syndromes). Ventilation tubes versus no treatment (four studies) The odds ratio (OR) for a return to normal hearing after 12 months was 1.13 with VTs (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 2.74; 54% versus 51%; 1 study, 72 participants; very low-certainty evidence). At six months, VTs may lead to a large reduction in persistent OME (risk ratio (RR) 0.30, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.65; 20.4% versus 68.0%; 1 study, 54 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the chance of persistent tympanic membrane perforation with VTs at 12 months (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.91; 8.3% versus 9.7%; 1 RCT, 144 participants). Early ventilation tubes versus watchful waiting (six studies) There was little to no difference in the proportion of children whose hearing returned to normal after 8 to 10 years (i.e. by the age of 9 to 13 years) (RR for VTs 0.98, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.03; 93% versus 95%; 1 study, 391 participants; very low-certainty evidence). VTs may also result in little to no difference in the risk of persistent OME after 18 months to 6 years (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.74; 15% versus 12%; 3 studies, 584 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We were unable to pool data on persistent perforation. One study showed that VTs may increase the risk of perforation after a follow-up duration of 3.75 years (RR 3.65, 95% CI 0.41 to 32.38; 1 study, 391 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the actual number of children who develop persistent perforation may be low, as demonstrated by another study (1.26%; 1 study, 635 ears; very low-certainty evidence). Ventilation tubes versus non-surgical treatment (one study) One study compared VTs to six months of antibiotics (sulphisoxazole). No data were available on return to normal hearing, but final hearing thresholds were reported. At four months, the mean difference was -5.98 dB HL lower (better) for those receiving VTs, but the evidence is very uncertain (95% CI -9.21 to -2.75; 1 study, 125 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No evidence was identified regarding persistent OME. VTs may result in a low risk of persistent perforation at 18 months of follow-up (no events reported; narrative synthesis of 1 study, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). Ventilation tubes versus myringotomy (nine studies) We are uncertain whether VTs may slightly increase the likelihood of returning to normal hearing at 6 to 12 months, since the confidence intervals were wide and included the possibility of no effect (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.53; 74% versus 64%; 2 studies, 132 participants; very low-certainty evidence). After six months, persistent OME may be reduced for those who receive VTs compared to laser myringotomy, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.38; 1 study, 272 participants; very low-certainty evidence). At six months, the risk of persistent perforation is probably similar with the use of VTs or laser myringotomy (narrative synthesis of 6 studies, 581 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There may be small short- and medium-term improvements in hearing and persistence of OME with VTs, but it is unclear whether these persist after longer follow-up. The RCTs included do not allow us to say when (or how much) VTs improve hearing in any specific child. However, interpretation of the evidence is difficult: many children in the control groups recover spontaneously or receive VTs during follow-up, VTs may block or extrude, and OME may recur. The limited evidence in this review also affects the generalisability/applicability of our findings to situations involving children with underlying conditions (e.g. craniofacial syndromes) or the use of long-acting tubes. Consequently, RCTs may not be the best way to determine whether an intervention is likely to be effective in any individual child. Instead, we must better understand the different OME phenotypes to target interventions to children who will benefit most, and avoid over-treating when spontaneous resolution is likely.

Adenoidectomy for otitis media with effusion (OME) in children

BACKGROUND

Otitis media with effusion (OME) is an accumulation of fluid in the middle ear cavity, common amongst young children. The fluid may cause hearing loss. When persistent, it may lead to developmental delay, social difficulty and poor quality of life. Management of OME includes watchful waiting, autoinflation, medical and surgical treatment. Adenoidectomy has often been used as a potential treatment for this condition.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of adenoidectomy, either alone or in combination with ventilation tubes (grommets), for OME in children.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 20 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials in children aged 6 months to 12 years with unilateral or bilateral OME. We included studies that compared adenoidectomy (alone, or in combination with ventilation tubes) with either no treatment or non-surgical treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes (determined following a multi-stakeholder prioritisation exercise): 1) hearing, 2) otitis media-specific quality of life, 3) haemorrhage.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

1) persistence of OME, 2) adverse effects, 3) receptive language skills, 4) speech development, 5) cognitive development, 6) psychosocial skills, 7) listening skills, 8) generic health-related quality of life, 9) parental stress, 10) vestibular function, 11) episodes of acute otitis media. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Although we included all measures of hearing assessment, the proportion of children who returned to normal hearing was our preferred method to assess hearing, due to challenges in interpreting the results of mean hearing thresholds.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies (1785 children). Many of the studies used concomitant interventions for all participants, including insertion of ventilation tubes or myringotomy. All included studies had at least some concerns regarding the risk of bias. We report results for our main outcome measures at the longest available follow-up. We did not identify any data on disease-specific quality of life for any of the comparisons. Further details of additional outcomes and time points are reported in the review. 1) Adenoidectomy (with or without myringotomy) versus no treatment/watchful waiting (three studies) After 12 months there was little difference in the proportion of children whose hearing had returned to normal, but the evidence was very uncertain (adenoidectomy 68%, no treatment 70%; risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.46; number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 50; 1 study, 42 participants). There is a risk of haemorrhage from adenoidectomy, but the absolute risk appears small (1/251 receiving adenoidectomy compared to 0/229, Peto odds ratio (OR) 6.77, 95% CI 0.13 to 342.54; 1 study, 480 participants; moderate certainty evidence). The risk of persistent OME may be slightly lower after two years in those receiving adenoidectomy (65% versus 73%), but again the difference was small (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00; NNTB 13; 3 studies, 354 participants; very low-certainty evidence). 2) Adenoidectomy (with or without myringotomy) versus non-surgical treatment No studies were identified for this comparison. 3) Adenoidectomy and bilateral ventilation tubes versus bilateral ventilation tubes (four studies) There was a slight increase in the proportion of ears with a return to normal hearing after six to nine months (57% adenoidectomy versus 42% without, RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.89; NNTB 7; 1 study, 127 participants (213 ears); very low-certainty evidence). Adenoidectomy may give an increased risk of haemorrhage, but the absolute risk appears small, and the evidence was uncertain (2/416 with adenoidectomy compared to 0/375 in the control group, Peto OR 6.68, 95% CI 0.42 to 107.18; 2 studies, 791 participants). The risk of persistent OME was similar for both groups (82% adenoidectomy and ventilation tubes compared to 85% ventilation tubes alone, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.07; very low-certainty evidence). 4) Adenoidectomy and unilateral ventilation tube versus unilateral ventilation tube (two studies) Slightly more children returned to normal hearing after adenoidectomy, but the confidence intervals were wide (57% versus 46%, RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.96; NNTB 9; 1 study, 72 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Fewer children may have persistent OME after 12 months, but again the confidence intervals were wide (27.2% compared to 40.5%, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.29; NNTB 8; 1 study, 74 participants). We did not identify any data on haemorrhage. 5) Adenoidectomy and ventilation tubes versus no treatment/watchful waiting (two studies) We did not identify data on the proportion of children who returned to normal hearing. However, after two years, the mean difference in hearing threshold for those allocated to adenoidectomy was -3.40 dB (95% CI -5.54 to -1.26; 1 study, 211 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be a small reduction in the proportion of children with persistent OME after two years, but the evidence was very uncertain (82% compared to 90%, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.01; NNTB 13; 1 study, 232 participants). We noted that many children in the watchful waiting group had also received surgery by this time point. 6) Adenoidectomy and ventilation tubes versus non-surgical treatment No studies were identified for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When assessed with the GRADE approach, the evidence for adenoidectomy in children with OME is very uncertain. Adenoidectomy may reduce the persistence of OME, although evidence about the effect of this on hearing is unclear. For patients and carers, a return to normal hearing is likely to be important, but few studies measured this outcome. We did not identify any evidence on disease-specific quality of life. There were few data on adverse effects, in particular postoperative bleeding. The risk of haemorrhage appears to be small, but should be considered when choosing a treatment strategy for children with OME. Future studies should aim to determine which children are most likely to benefit from treatment, rather than offering interventions to all children.

Grommets (ventilation tubes) for recurrent acute otitis media in children

BACKGROUND

Acute otitis media (AOM) is one of the most common childhood illnesses. While many children experience sporadic AOM episodes, an important group suffer from recurrent AOM (rAOM), defined as three or more episodes in six months, or four or more in one year. In this subset of children AOM poses a true burden through frequent episodes of ear pain, general illness, sleepless nights and time lost from nursery or school. Grommets, also called ventilation or tympanostomy tubes, can be offered for rAOM.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of bilateral grommet insertion with or without concurrent adenoidectomy in children with rAOM.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 4 December 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bilateral grommet insertion with or without concurrent adenoidectomy and no ear surgery in children up to age 16 years with rAOM. We planned to apply two main scenarios: grommets as a single surgical intervention and grommets as concurrent treatment with adenoidectomy (i.e. children in both the intervention and comparator groups underwent adenoidectomy). The comparators included active monitoring, antibiotic prophylaxis and placebo medication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were: proportion of children who have no AOM recurrences at three to six months follow-up (intermediate-term) and persistent tympanic membrane perforation (significant adverse event). Secondary outcomes were: proportion of children who have no AOM recurrences at six to 12 months follow-up (long-term); total number of AOM recurrences, disease-specific and generic health-related quality of life, presence of middle ear effusion and other adverse events at short-term, intermediate-term and long-term follow-up. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.

MAIN RESULTS

Five RCTs (805 children) with unclear or high risk of bias were included. All studies were conducted prior to the introduction of pneumococcal vaccination in the countries' national immunisation programmes. In none of the trials was adenoidectomy performed concurrently in both groups.Grommets versus active monitoringGrommets were more effective than active monitoring in terms of:- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at six months (one study, 95 children, 46% versus 5%; risk ratio (RR) 9.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.38 to 37.80, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 3; low-quality evidence);- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at 12 months (one study, 200 children, 48% versus 34%; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.99, NNTB 8; low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at six months (one study, 95 children, mean number of AOM recurrences per child: 0.67 versus 2.17, mean difference (MD) -1.50, 95% CI -1.99 to -1.01; low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at 12 months (one study, 200 children, one-year AOM incidence rate: 1.15 versus 1.70, incidence rate difference -0.55, 95% -0.17 to -0.93; low-quality evidence).Children receiving grommets did not have better disease-specific health-related quality of life (Otitis Media-6 questionnaire) at four (one study, 85 children) or 12 months (one study, 81 children) than those managed by active monitoring (low-quality evidence).One study reported no persistent tympanic membrane perforations among 54 children receiving grommets (low-quality evidence).Grommets versus antibiotic prophylaxisIt is uncertain whether or not grommets are more effective than antibiotic prophylaxis in terms of:- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at six months (two studies, 96 children, 60% versus 35%; RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.65, I² = 0%, fixed-effect model, NNTB 5; very low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at six months (one study, 43 children, mean number of AOM recurrences per child: 0.86 versus 1.38, MD -0.52, 95% CI -1.37 to 0.33; very low-quality evidence).Grommets versus placebo medicationGrommets were more effective than placebo medication in terms of:- proportion of children who had no AOM recurrence at six months (one study, 42 children, 55% versus 15%; RR 3.64, 95% CI 1.20 to 11.04, NNTB 3; very low-quality evidence);- number of AOM recurrences at six months (one study, 42 children, mean number of AOM recurrences per child: 0.86 versus 2.0, MD -1.14, 95% CI -2.06 to -0.22; very low-quality evidence).One study reported persistent tympanic membrane perforations in 3 of 76 children (4%) receiving grommets (low-quality evidence).Subgroup analysisThere were insufficient data to determine whether presence of middle ear effusion at randomisation, type of grommet or age modified the effectiveness of grommets.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence on the effectiveness of grommets in children with rAOM is limited to five RCTs with unclear or high risk of bias, which were conducted prior to the introduction of pneumococcal vaccination. Low to very low-quality evidence suggests that children receiving grommets are less likely to have AOM recurrences compared to those managed by active monitoring and placebo medication, but the magnitude of the effect is modest with around one fewer episode at six months and a less noticeable effect by 12 months. The low to very low quality of the evidence means that these numbers need to be interpreted with caution since the true effects may be substantially different. It is uncertain whether or not grommets are more effective than antibiotic prophylaxis. The risk of persistent tympanic membrane perforation after grommet insertion was low.Widespread use of pneumococcal vaccination has changed the bacteriology and epidemiology of AOM, and how this might impact the results of prior trials is unknown. New and high-quality RCTs of grommet insertion in children with rAOM are therefore needed. These trials should not only focus on the frequency of AOM recurrences, but also collect data on the severity of AOM episodes, antibiotic consumption and adverse effects of both surgery and antibiotics. This is particularly important since grommets may reduce the severity of AOM recurrences and allow for topical rather than oral antibiotic treatment.

Timing for Removal of Asymptomatic Long-Term Ventilation Tube in Children

Otitis media with effusion (OME) is the most frequent illness in children. Surgical treatment options include ventilation tube insertion, adenoidectomy or both. Opinions regarding the risks, benefits and intubation period of ventilation tube insertion vary greatly. To determine the appropriate time for when to remove asymptomatic longterm ventilation T-tubes in children. In this prospective study, we analyzed the results of 120 pediatric patients (6-12 years) (240 ears) with persistent OME; we employed the Goode T-silicone tubes. We intentionally planned to remove the tubes at different time points of the study and divided our patients randomly into four subgroups with 30 patents (60 ears in each) according to the intubation period; group I: intubation for 6 months, group II: intubation for 12 months, group III: intubation for 18 months and group IV: intubation for 24 months. The relationship between intubation period and OME recurrence, the rate of persistent tympanic membrane (TM) perforation, granulation tissue or discharge near the tympanostomy tubes, normalization of Eustachian tube function and change of hearing level was analyzed in each patient group. The χ2 analysis showed that the rate of normalization of ET function was significantly higher when tubes were removed after 12-months of intubation (P = 0.002), the rate of OME recurrence was significantly higher when tubes were removed before 12-months of intubation (P = 0.004), The rate of otorrhea significantly increased after 12-months of intubation, development of granulation around tubes was significantly higher after 18-months of tube insertion. The rate of appearance of permanent TM perforation significantly increased after 18-months from tube insertion (P = 0.008). Adenoidectomy did not significantly influence the recurrence rate of OME or the rate of persistent TM peroration after tube removal. Our present results suggest that the appropriate intubation period for healing OME in children would be at 12-18 months. Also, we can conclude that longterm ventilation tubes are recommended to avoid repeated intubation and to obtain sufficient results, although their performance is not always satisfactory; mainly because of accompanying complications.

Grommets (ventilation tubes) for hearing loss associated with otitis media with effusion in children

BACKGROUND

Otitis media with effusion (OME; 'glue ear') is common in childhood and surgical treatment with grommets (ventilation tubes) is widespread but controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of grommet insertion compared with myringotomy or non-surgical treatment in children with OME.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane ENT Disorders Group Trials Register, other electronic databases and additional sources for published and unpublished trials (most recent search: 22 March 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of grommets. Outcomes studied included hearing level, duration of middle ear effusion, language and speech development, cognitive development, behaviour and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from studies were extracted by two authors and checked by the other authors.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (1728 participants). Some trials randomised children (grommets versus no grommets), others ears (grommet one ear only). The severity of OME in children varied between trials. Only one 'by child' study (MRC: TARGET) had particularly stringent audiometric entry criteria. No trial was identified that used long-term grommets.Grommets were mainly beneficial in the first six months by which time natural resolution lead to improved hearing in the non-surgically treated children also. Only one high quality trial that randomised children (N = 211) reported results at three months; the mean hearing level was 12 dB better (95% CI 10 to 14 dB) in those treated with grommets as compared to the controls. Meta-analyses of three high quality trials (N = 523) showed a benefit of 4 dB (95% CI 2 to 6 dB) at six to nine months. At 12 and 18 months follow up no differences in mean hearing levels were found.Data from three trials that randomised ears (N = 230 ears) showed similar effects to the trials that randomised children. At four to six months mean hearing level was 10 dB better in the grommet ear (95% CI 5 to 16 dB), and at 7 to 12 months and 18 to 24 months was 6 dB (95% CI 2 to 10 dB) and 5 dB (95% CI 3 to 8 dB) dB better.No effect was found on language or speech development or for behaviour, cognitive or quality of life outcomes.Tympanosclerosis was seen in about a third of ears that received grommets. Otorrhoea was common in infants, but in older children (three to seven years) occurred in < 2% of grommet ears over two years of follow up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children with OME the effect of grommets on hearing, as measured by standard tests, appears small and diminishes after six to nine months by which time natural resolution also leads to improved hearing in the non-surgically treated children. No effect was found on other child outcomes but data on these were sparse. No study has been performed in children with established speech, language, learning or developmental problems so no conclusions can be made regarding treatment of such children.

Adenoidectomy for recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms in children

BACKGROUND

Adenoidectomy, surgical removal of the adenoids, is a common ENT operation worldwide in children with recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms. A systematic review on the effectiveness of adenoidectomy in this specific group has not previously been performed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of adenoidectomy versus non-surgical management in children with recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; mRCT and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 30 March 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing adenoidectomy, with or without tympanostomy tubes, versus non-surgical management or tympanostomy tubes alone in children with recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms. The primary outcome studied was the number of episodes, days per episode and per year with nasal symptoms and the proportion of children with recurrent episodes of nasal symptoms. Secondary outcomes were mean number of episodes, mean number of days per episode and per year, and proportion of children with nasal obstruction alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study included children scheduled for adenoidectomy because of recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms or middle ear disease. In this study no beneficial effect of adenoidectomy was found. The numbers in this study were, however, small (n = 76) and the quality of the study was moderate. The outcome was improvement in episodes of common colds. The risk differences were non-significant, being 2% (95% CI -18% to 22%) and -11% (95% CI -28% to 7%) after 12 and 24 months, respectively.A second study included children with recurrent acute otitis media (n = 180). As otitis media is known to be associated with nasal symptoms, the number of days with rhinitis was studied as a secondary outcome measure. The risk difference was non-significant, being -4 days (95% CI -13 to 7 days).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence regarding the effect of adenoidectomy on recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms or nasal obstruction alone is sparse, inconclusive and has a significant risk of bias.High quality trials assessing the effectiveness of adenoidectomy in children with recurrent or chronic nasal symptoms should be initiated.

Adenoidectomy for otitis media in children

BACKGROUND

Adenoidectomy, surgical removal of the adenoids, is a common ENT operation worldwide in children with otitis media. A systematic review on the effectiveness of adenoidectomy in this specific group has not previously been performed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of adenoidectomy versus non-surgical management or tympanostomy tubes in children with otitis media.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; mRCT and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 30 March 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing adenoidectomy, with or without tympanostomy tubes, versus non-surgical management or tympanostomy tubes only in children with otitis media. The primary outcome studied was the proportion of time with otitis media with effusion (OME). Secondary outcomes were mean number of episodes, mean number of days per episode and per year, and proportion of children with either acute otitis media (AOM) or otitis media with effusion (OME), as well as mean hearing level. Tertiary outcome measures included atrophy of the tympanic membrane, tympanosclerosis, retraction of the pars tensa and pars flaccid and cholesteatoma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen randomised controlled trials (2712 children) studying the effectiveness of adenoidectomy in children with otitis media were evaluated. Most of these trials were too heterogeneous to pool in a meta-analysis. Loss to follow up varied from 0% to 63% after two years.Adenoidectomy in combination with a unilateral tympanostomy tube has a beneficial effect on the resolution of OME (risk difference (RD) 22% (95% CI 12% to 32%) and 29% (95% CI 19% to 39%) for the non-operated ear at six and 12 months, respectively (n = 3 trials)) and a very small (< 5 dB) effect on hearing, compared to a unilateral tympanostomy tube only. The results of studies of adenoidectomy with or without myringotomy versus non-surgical treatment or myringotomy only, and those of adenoidectomy in combination with bilateral tympanostomy tubes versus bilateral tympanostomy tubes only, also showed a small beneficial effect of adenoidectomy on the resolution of the effusion. The latter results could not be pooled due to large heterogeneity of the trials.Regarding AOM, the results of none of the trials including this outcome indicate a significant beneficial effect of adenoidectomy. The trials were too heterogeneous to pool in a meta-analysis.The effects of adenoidectomy on changes of the tympanic membrane or cholesteatoma have not been studied.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows a significant benefit of adenoidectomy as far as the resolution of middle ear effusion in children with OME is concerned. However, the benefit to hearing is small and the effects on changes in the tympanic membrane are unknown. The risks of operating should be weighed against these potential benefits.The absence of a significant benefit of adenoidectomy on AOM suggests that routine surgery for this indication is not warranted.

Grommets (ventilation tubes) for hearing loss associated with otitis media with effusion in children

BACKGROUND

Otitis media with effusion (OME), or 'glue ear', is very common in children, especially between the ages of one and three years with a prevalence of 10% to 30% and a cumulative incidence of 80% at the age of four years. OME is defined as middle ear effusion without signs or symptoms of an acute infection. OME may occur as a primary disorder or as a sequel to acute otitis media. The functional effect of OME is a conductive hearing level of about 25 to 30 dB associated with fluid in the middle ear. Both the high incidence and the high rate of spontaneous resolution suggest that the presence of OME is a natural phenomenon, its presence at some stage in childhood being a normal finding. Notwithstanding this, some children with OME may go on to develop chronic otitis media with structural changes (tympanic membrane retraction pockets, erosion of portions of the ossicular chain and cholesteatoma), language delays and behavioural problems. It remains uncertain whether or not any of these findings are direct consequences of OME. The most common medical treatment options include the use of decongestants, mucolytics, steroids, antihistamines and antibiotics. The effectiveness of these therapies has not been established. Surgical treatment options include grommet (ventilation or tympanostomy tube) insertion, adenoidectomy or both. Opinions regarding the risks and benefits of grommet insertion vary greatly. The management of OME therefore remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of grommet insertion compared with myringotomy or non-surgical treatment in children with OME. The outcomes studied were (i) hearing level, (ii) duration of middle ear effusion, (iii) well-being (quality of life) and (iv) prevention of developmental sequelae possibly attributable to the hearing loss (for example, impairment in impressive and expressive language development (measured using standardised tests), verbal intelligence, and behaviour).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to 2003), EMBASE (1973 to 2003) and reference lists of all identified studies. The date of the last systematic search was March 2003, and personal non-systematic searches have been performed up to August 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of grommets on hearing, duration of effusion, development of language, cognition, behaviour or quality of life. Only studies using common types of grommets (mean function time of 6 to 12 months) were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data from studies were extracted by two reviewers and checked by the other reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Children treated with grommets spent 32% less time (95% confidence interval (CI) 17% to 48%) with effusion during the first year of follow-up. Treatment with grommets improved hearing levels, especially during the first six months. In the randomised controlled trials that studied the effect of grommet insertion alone, the mean hearing levels improved by around 9 dB (95% CI 4 dB to 14 dB) after the first six months, and 6 dB (95% CI 3 dB to 9 dB) after 12 months. In the randomised controlled trials that studied the combined effect of grommets and adenoidectomy, the additional effect of the grommets on hearing levels was improvement by 3 to 4 dB (95% CI 2 dB to 5 dB) at six months and about 1 to 2 dB (95% CI 0 dB to 3 dB) at 12 months. Ears treated with grommets had an additional risk for tympanosclerosis of 0.33 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.45) one to five years later. In otherwise healthy children with long-standing OME and hearing loss, early insertion of grommets had no effect on language development or cognition. One randomised controlled trial in children with OME more than nine months, hearing loss and disruptions to speech, language, learning or behaviour showed a very marginal effect of grommets on comprehensive language.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of grommets in children appear small. The effect of grommets on hearing diminished during the first year. Potentially adverse effects on the tympanic membrane are common after grommet insertion. Therefore an initial period of watchful waiting seems to be an appropriate management strategy for most children with OME. As no evidence is yet available for the subgroups of children with speech or language delays, behavioural and learning problems or children with defined clinical syndromes (generally excluded from the primary studies included in this review), the clinician will need to make decisions regarding treatment for such children based on other evidence and indications of disability related to hearing impairment. This review does not resolve the discrepancy between parental and clinical observation of a beneficial treatment effect and the results in the reviewed RCT showing only a short-term effect on hearing and virtually no effect on development. Is the perceived, often dramatic, effect of grommets only a short-term one? Are some children more sensitive to OME-related hearing loss than others? If so, how do we identify them?Further research should focus upon indications. Studies should use sufficiently large sample sizes to show significant interactions. There is a need to determine the most suitable variables and appropriate "softer" outcomes to be the subject of these interaction tests. Interesting options include measures of speech-in-noise and binaural hearing. The generally modest results in the trials which are included in this review should make it easier to justify randomisation of more severely affected and higher-risk children in appropriately constructed trials. Randomised controlled trials are necessary in these children before more detailed conclusions about the effectiveness of grommets can be drawn.

'Glue ear' in perspective

Contrary to common perception 'glue ear' is a vast and complex subject. It is the most common cause of hearing loss in children; its treatment is often questioned and involves utilisation of substantial health service resources. This article is aimed not only at placing the condition in perspective but also at establishing a short yet comprehensive understanding of its many aspects including aetiology and management. There is no intention, however, to dwell here excessively upon its intricacies and abstrusities.

Timing for removal of tympanic ventilation tube in children

The medical records of 220 ears of 137 pediatric patients (85 male and 52 female) in which three kinds of ventilation tubes were inserted for treating otitis media with effusion (OME) were reviewed. The tubes selected were the Shepard grommet (75 ears), Goode-T (39 ears), and Paparella type II tube (106 ears). The criteria for tube placement were as follows: (1) continuous conductive hearing loss with over 25 dB air-bone gap, (2) resistance to conservative therapy for over 6 months, and (3) retracted and glue-colored tympanic membrane with type B tympanogram. The tubes that remained in place for over 18-24 months were removed intentionally in combination with a freshening of the perforation edge and tape-patch technique using Steri-Strip tape (3M) for preventing permanent eardrum perforation, because the incidence of persistent perforation became higher after long-term intubation. Shepard grommets tended to be extruded earlier, while Paparella type II tubes tended to stay longer. The OME recurrence rate decreased 12 months or more after tubal insertion. There was a tendency for the recurrence rate to decrease the longer the tube stayed in the eardrum. The number of recurrences decreased when the patient's age at the tube removal or extrusion was 7-8 years old. Adenoidectomy did not influence the recurrence rate of OME. Although the Goode-T and Paparella tube II tubes showed high perforation rates, the perforation rate after extrusion or removal of the tube was decreased by the use of the tape patch technique in combination with a freshening of the perforation edge. From these findings, it was concluded that the appropriate intubation period for the treatment of OME in children is over 12 months with the use of a long-term tube, and that if the patient's age at the time of tube insertion was below 6 years, it might be better that the removal of the tube is postponed until the patient is 8 years of age.

A randomized study of the surgical management of children with persistent otitis media with effusion associated with a hearing impairment

The object of this study was to compare the effect on the hearing of the insertion of a grommet, with or without adenoidectomy, against a non-surgically managed control ear in children with persistent hearing impairment due to otitis media with effusion. Seventy-eight children (44 boys, 34 girls, mean age 5.8 years) with documented bilateral otitis media with effusion associated with a bilateral hearing impairment (pure tone average air conduction thresholds over 0.5, 1 and 2 kHz of > or = 25 dB HL) over a three month period were admitted to a randomized, controlled trial. Each child was randomized to have or not to have an adenoidectomy. The ears in each child were then randomly allocated to have a grommet (tympanostomy tube) inserted. The children's hearing status was reviewed six and 12 months post-operatively. During follow-up, should a child redevelop a persistent bilateral hearing impairment (as defined above) for three months they were managed with a hearing aid. Thus no child had repeat insertion of a grommet. Surgery of each type had an effect on the hearing and the presence of otitis media with effusion at six months post-operatively but not at 12 months when it was no different from natural resolution. If resolution of the otitis media with effusion is the outcome measure, then adenoidectomy alone is significantly better than no surgery but only in boys rather than in girls. Even in boys it only resolves about 60 per cent of effusions. However, when combined with a grommet (one insertion) adenoidectomy gives no greater resolution (89 per cent compared with 86 per cent).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Can meta-analysis help uncertainty in surgery for otitis media in children

While otitis media is perhaps the most common disease of childhood that receives medical attention, there is little agreement concerning the efficacy of the medical and surgical therapies employed to try to alleviate its symptoms or hasten its natural resolution. Because various surgeries including adenoidectomy, myringotomy, and insertion of tympanostomy tubes are frequently involved in the treatment of otitis media with effusion (OME), it is likely the most expensive condition being managed in national terms. In an attempt to elucidate the most appropriate management of this condition, a meta-analysis was attempted to the 12 randomized control trials of surgical treatments for OME in children, published between 1966 and 1990. Heterogeneity both in the populations and comparisons studied and in the outcomes presented made meta-analysis an inappropriate method for clarifying this area of clinical uncertainty. Important elements in the design of randomized control trials that should be included in future studies of treatment for OME are therefore discussed.

A randomised controlled trial of surgery for glue ear

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of five different surgical treatments for glue ear (secretory otitis media) on improvement in hearing and, assuming one or more treatments to be effective, to identify the appropriate indications for surgery.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial of children receiving (a) adenoidectomy, bilateral myringotomy, and insertion of a unilateral grommet; (b) adenoidectomy, unilateral myringotomy, and insertion of a unilateral grommet; (c) bilateral myringotomy and insertion of a unilateral grommet; and (d) unilateral myringotomy and insertion of a grommet. Children were followed up at seven weeks, six months, 12 months, and 24 months by symptom history and clinical investigations.

SETTING

Otolaryngology department in an urban hospital.

PATIENTS

149 Children aged 4-9 years who were admitted for surgery for glue ear and who had no history of previous operations on tonsils, adenoids, or ears and no evidence of sensorineural deafness. Inadequate follow up information on levels of hearing and on middle ear function was obtained from 22.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mean hearing loss (dB) of the three worst heard frequencies between 250 and 4000 Hz, results of impedance tympanometry, and parental views on their child's progress.

RESULTS

In the 127 children for whom adequate information was available ears in which a grommet had been inserted performed better in the short term (for at least six months) than those in which no grommet had been inserted, irrespective of any accompanying procedure. Most of the benefit had disappeared by 12 months. Adenoidectomy produced a slight improvement that was not significant, though was sustained for at least two years. The ears of children who had had an adenoidectomy with myringotomy and grommet insertion, however, continued to improve so that two years after surgery about 50% had abnormal tympanometry compared with 83% of those who had had only myringotomy and grommet insertion, and 93% of the group that had had no treatment. Logistic regression analyses identified preoperative hearing level as the single best predictor of good outcome from surgery. Other variables contributed little additional predictive power.

CONCLUSIONS

If the principal objective of surgery for glue ear is to restore hearing then our study shows that insertion of grommets is the treatment of choice. The addition of an adenoidectomy will increase the likelihood of restoration of normal function of the middle ear but will not improve hearing. When deciding appropriate indications for surgery, a balance has to be made between performing unnecessary operations and failing to treat patients who might benefit from surgical intervention. Preoperative audiometry scores might be the best predictor in helping to make this decision.

Effect of adenoidectomy on otitis media with effusion, tubal function, and sinusitis

Three clinical studies were performed to investigate the effects of adenoidectomy on otitis media with effusion (OME), especially with regard to eustachian tube (ET) disfunction and sinusitis, which often accompanies OME. In the first study, the audiograms, tympanograms, and ET ventilatory functions of 78 adenoidectomized patients (121 ears) and 54 non-adenoidectomized patients (63 ears) were compared over 6 months. The audiograms and tympanograms of the adenoidectomized group showed significant improvement; however, no difference in passive tubal opening pressure was noted despite an improvement in positive pressure equalizing function observed in the adenoidectomized group at 6 months after the operation. In the second study, tubal passive resistance (PR) and the ratio of passive resistance to active resistance (PR/AR) were compared before and 1 month after adenoidectomy using the forced response test (12 subjects, 12 ears). Neither PR nor PR/AR had significantly improved after the operation. In the third study, sinusitis improvement in 45 adenoidectomized patients 6 months after the operation was evaluated in comparison with 33 non-adenoidectomized patients. This condition was found to have improved significantly in the adenoidectomized group. Overall, adenoidectomy appeared effective in reducing the incidence of OME and sinusitis, and in improving the active ventilatory function of the ET without causing changes in the tubal passage. It is conceivable that tubal active ventilatory function was improved due to a reduction of inflammation and pollution around the nasopharynx by adenoidectomy, and that the effect of adenoid mass on the ET is minimal.

Screening for otitis media with effusion in preschool children

1439 Dutch children were included in a randomised trial to evaluate the efficacy of preschool screening for otitis media with effusion (OME) by 3-monthly tympanometry. Children with bilateral OME on two consecutive occasions were referred for further investigation and then, if parents gave their consent, allocated at random to treatment or non-treatment groups. The effect of childhood screening for OME and subsequent treatment was evaluated by assessment of language performance; no benefit was found, mainly because of the large degree of spontaneous recovery.

Etiological role of adenoids upon otitis media with effusion

To clarify the etiological role of adenoids in OME, the effects of adenoidectomy on Eustachian tube function and nasal sinusitis were examined. Adenoids were found to exert no influence upon tubal opening pressure, nor patency of the Eustachian tube in a static condition. Active function of the tube during swallowing, however, was improved significantly by the adenoidectomy. In addition, adenoidectomy improved nasal sinusitis, and in such patients, their active tubal function was satisfactory. From these results, adenoidectomy was considered to cure OME, partly via improvement of the pathological condition of the nasopharynx represented by nasal sinusitis.

The effectiveness of adenoidectomy in the treatment of glue ear: a randomized controlled trial

One hundred children with glue ear, in whom surgical treatment was indicated, were randomly allocated to 1 of 4 treatment groups. Children in 2 of the groups underwent adenoidectomy plus various combinations of ear operations while in the other 2 groups surgery was confined to the ears. The effect of adenoidectomy was assessed 6 weeks, 6 months and 1 year after surgery by means of audiometry, impedance tympanometry and parental opinion. Improvements in hearing were greater in those children who underwent an adenoidectomy than in those who did not (4.0 dB at 6 weeks; 2.4 dB at 6 months; 0.7 dB at 1 year). However, these differences are of little clinical significance and were only statistically significant (P less than 0.05) 6 weeks after surgery. Middle ear function, measured by tympanometry, revealed a similar pattern of response to treatment. Despite this, 6 months after surgery a higher proportion of parents were satisfied with their child's condition if an adenoidectomy had been performed. Possible explanations of this discrepancy between clinical and parental assessments of outcome are discussed.

The effect of adenoidectomy on secretory otitis media: a 2-year controlled prospective study

Seventy-eight preschool children considered to be suffering from long-standing secretory otitis media on the basis of a combination of impaired or abolished mobility of the tympanic membrane and conductive deafness, were examined consecutively. All children underwent bilateral paracentesis. Those children whose ears contained mucous secretion subsequently constituted a prospective longitudinal study group. On the same occasion as the paracentesis was performed, 24 children with bilateral or unilateral mucous secretion in their ears underwent adenoidectomy. Thirty-five non-adenoidectomized children with mucous secretion in one or both ears served as controls. Both groups were followed up for 24 months. At the end of this period they were compared with respect to the state and mobility of the eardrum, a pure tone average audiogram and middle ear impedance. No difference was detected between the two groups. It is therefore concluded that the preventive and therapeutic effects of adenoidectomy on secretory otitis media are doubtful.