Lens drain versus Donaldson drain: intermediate results of a prospective comparative study of a new versus a classical ventilation tube.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Lens drain versus Donaldson drain: intermediate results of a prospective comparative study of a new versus a classical ventilation tube][Article in Dutch]


Gordts F, Clement PA, Derde MP.
Dienst N.K.O., Academisch Ziekenhuis en Farmaceutisch Instituut, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

A prospective study was undertaken in which in 72 children a new type of tympanostomy tube, the Lens drain, was inserted in one ear, and a Donaldson drain was inserted in the contralateral ear as a control. The average survival times of both tubes especially seemed to differ significantly: 15.25 months for the new tube, and 10.53 months for the conventional tube (p less than 0.05). By contrast, the relapse rate (20% with the Lens tube versus 27% with the Donaldson tube) after extrusion or extraction, and the residual perforation rate (8% with the Lens tube versus 5% with the Donaldson tube) were not significantly different. Otorrhea was apparently present equally frequently with either tube: 19% with the Lens tube versus 15% with the Donaldson tube.
Original languageDutch
Pages (from-to)59-65
Number of pages7
JournalActa Oto-Rhino-Laryngologica Belgica
Volume43
Publication statusPublished - 1989

Keywords

  • Donaldson drain
  • Lens drain
  • prospective comparative study
  • study of a new versus a classical ventilation tube

Cite this