Faculty Bibliography

With a cochlear implant, when stimulation from multiple channels is interleaved, the perceived loudness is greater than the loudness associated with any of the individual channels presented in isolation. This phenomenon is known as loudness summation. This study examined if loudness summation with monopolar and tripolar stimulation were equivalent at two loudnesses and two spacing configurations. Results suggest that loudness summation is similar for monopolar and tripolar modes. However, larger summation differences were observed for softer sounds and louder sounds with a larger spatial separation. The results are consistent with the idea that loudness summation is dependent on channel interaction and have implications for implementing current-focused processing strategies.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively review our single institution experience of patients with tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 1999 and 2005, a total of 79 patients were identified. Stage distribution was as follows: stages I-II, III, IVA, and IVB were in 6, 14, 43, and 16 patients, respectively. Sixty-three patients (80%) were male. Median age was 55.5 years. Treatment generally consisted of external beam radiation therapy (RT) (median dose, 70 Gy), concomitant chemotherapy (CCRT) (cisplatin 100 mg/m on days 1, 22, and 43), and neck dissection (ND), and was administered as follows: stages I/II, 6 patients received RT alone; stages III/IVA, 20, 5, and 32 patients received RT alone, CCRT, and CCRT followed by ND, respectively; stage IVB, 9 and 7 patients received CCRT and CCRT plus ND, respectively. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 56 months (range, 12 to 122 mo), the 5-year local control (LC), regional control (RC), distant control (DC), and overall survival (OS) by stage were as follows: stage I-II 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%; stage III-IVA 98%, 96%, 95%, and 88%; stage IVB 100%, 100%, 69%, and 66%, respectively. Among stage IVB patients, DC was significantly lower (P=0.01) and a trend toward lower OS was noted (P=0.08). Long-term percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy dependence was noted in 3% of them who had received CCRT. The effect of both chemotherapy and ND on treatment outcomes was analyzed; in stage III/IVA patients treated with or without chemotherapy, LC was 97% and 100% (P=0.43); RC was 92% and 100%(P=0.27); and DC was 91% and 94% (P=0.92), respectively. In stage III/IVA, patients treated with CCRT with or without ND, RC was 100% and 88%, respectively (P=0.087). CONCLUSIONS: Primary radiotherapy with or without CCRT followed by ND provides excellent tumor control with acceptable toxicity in treating squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil.

Should one use an open or closed rhinoplasty approach? How appropriate is the endonasal approach in modern-day rhinoplasty? Should the tip lobule be divided or preserved? Are alloplastic implants inferior to autologous implants? Does release and reduction of the upper lateral cartilages from the nasal dorsal septum always require spreader graft placement to prevent mid one-third nasal pinching in reduction rhinoplasty? Over past 5 years, how have rhinoplasty techniques and approaches evolved?

Background: The incidence of well-differentiated thyroid cancer (WDTC) in the United States is increasing rapidly. Much of this increase is due to the detection by imaging of small, nonpalpable tumors. The incidence of advanced WDTC is also increasing, suggesting a true increase in the incidence of WDTC. This study was performed to determine how WDTCs of all sizes and stages are initially detected. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 519 patients who underwent surgery for WDTC from January 1, 2007, through August 31, 2010, was performed. A total of 473 patients suitable for inclusion in this study were divided into three groups based upon the method by which the tumor was initially detected: tumors detected by an imaging study (184 patients-39%), those detected because a mass was felt in the neck (218 patients-46%), and those detected incidentally on pathological study of the surgical specimen (71 patients-15%). Method of detection was correlated with age and sex of the patient, and size, stage, and nodal status of the tumor. Results: Patients in the Palpation group were more likely to be female (79% vs. 67% vs. 74%), younger (46 vs. 51 vs. 52), and to have larger tumors than those in the Imaging or Incidental groups. In the Imaging group, the tumor was detected on thyroid sonogram in 98 (53%), computed tomography in 38 (21%), magnetic resonance imaging in 19 (10%), carotid duplex scan in 14 (8%), and positron-emission tomography or other imaging studies in 15 (8%). Thirty-three percent of tumors <1 cm, 51% 1-2 cm, 29% 2-4 cm, and 38% >4 cm were first detected on an imaging study. Forty-seven percent of Stage III and IV cancers in patients aged >/=45 years and 39% of patients with positive central nodes were in the Imaging group. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that while most tumors discovered by imaging were small and early stage, almost half of advanced (Stage III and IV) WDTCs were initially discovered by imaging studies. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the frequent use of imaging studies may explain not only the increasing incidence of early WDTC, but more advanced thyroid cancers as well.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the incidence of postoperative voice, swallowing, and other problems, including time to resolution following anterior transcervical approaches to the cervical spine, and to assess surgical factors associated with outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Historical cohort study. SETTING: Academic medical center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred eighty-eight consecutive patients with cervical spine disease who underwent an anterior transcervical approach to the spine by a single head and neck surgeon over a 4-year time period. Rather than primary, single-level approaches, all patients in this study had multilevel, high-cervical (above C4), low-cervical (below C6), and/or revision approaches. Postoperative voice, swallowing, and other complaints were measured as well as time to resolution using Kaplan-Meier method. Surgical factors related to outcomes were analyzed using regression analysis. RESULTS: Follow-up was available for 129 patients, with average and median time of 35 months. Seventy-seven patients (60%) had a postoperative issue, including 35 patients (27%) with postoperative voice complaint, 62 patients (48%) with postoperative swallowing complaint, and 16 patients (12%) with other problems. Swallowing and voice complaints persisted beyond 1 year in 28% and 9% of patients, respectively. Approaching spinal levels above C4 and exposing more than 3 spinal levels were 2 factors significantly related to voice and swallowing problems. CONCLUSION: There is a high incidence of subjective voice and swallowing complaints following transcervical anterior approaches to the spine, and such complaints can persist beyond 1 year in many patients. Exposure of more than 3 spinal levels or above level C4 are 2 factors significantly associated with outcome.

This study investigates the feasibility of using binaural dichotic presentation of speech components decomposed using a recently proposed resonance-based decomposition method to release listeners from intra-speech masking and yield better perceived sound quality. Resonance-based decomposition is a nonlinear signal analysis method based not on frequency or scale but on resonance. We decomposed different categories of speech stimuli (vowels, consonants, and sentences) into low-and high-resonance component using various combination of low-and high-Q-factors {Q1,Q2}. 10 normal hearing listeners were asked to rate the perceived quality of each individual decomposed component presented diotically, and in pair presented dichotically. We found that the perceived quality rating of these resonance components when presented in pair was higher than the mean of perceived quality ratings of these resonance components when presented individually. Our result suggests that listeners were able to fuse binaural dichotic presentation of high-and low-resonance components and perceived better sound quality.

BACKGROUND: To determine whether American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts (CORE) grants influence career paths and scholarly impact of fellowship-trained rhinologists, and whether funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and CORE programs is associated with increased scholarly impact among rhinologists. Another aim was to explore whether obtaining CORE grant funding is associated with NIH award acquisition. METHODS: Practice setting, academic rank, and fellowship-training status were determined for individuals in the CORE grant database. The h-index and publication experience of practitioners was calculated using the Scopus database. Faculty listings were used to determine this data for a non-CORE-grants-funded "control" group of academic rhinologists. Active and past NIH funding was obtained using the NIH RePORTER database. RESULTS: Fifteen of 26 (57.7%) fellowship-trained rhinologists receiving CORE grants were funded for rhinologic projects. Five of 6 rhinologists receiving NIH funding had a CORE-grants-funding history. Twenty-two of 26 (84.6%) rhinologists receiving CORE funding are currently in academic practice. Academic rhinologists receiving CORE or NIH funding had higher h-indices, a result reaching significance among promoted faculty and those with greater than 10 years of publication experience. CONCLUSION: Encouraging the pursuit of CORE grants among junior faculty as well as trainees interested in rhinology may be a strategy for developing highly effective research habits that pay dividends after the first few years of one's career. Fellowship-trained rhinologists with a CORE funding history predominantly pursue careers in academic medicine, although their CORE projects are not necessarily related to rhinologic topics.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: Glucocorticoids (GCs) are commonly used in the treatment of laryngeal disorders despite the absence of clear guidelines regarding their use. We sought to assess clinical practice patterns regarding GC use for various vocal fold diseases and to ascertain factors underlying the selection of particular GCs for different vocal fold pathology. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, survey. METHODS: A web-based 20-question survey querying clinical indications for GC use and other factors influencing decision making in GC administration was distributed to 5280 otolaryngologists via e-mail using a commercially available database. RESULTS: The overall response rate for the survey was 4% (212/5280). Of the respondents, 99% reported GCs to be valuable in their practice. Previous experience/results, familiarity, and use in practice (68%, 54%, and 37%, respectively) were the most commonly cited reasons for choosing a particular GC; pharmacokinetic profile and academic literature were infrequently cited reasons. Fifty-four percent of respondents were more likely to prescribe GCs for vocal performers compared with other patients. Additionally, most respondents stated that the potential for side effects only occasionally prevented GC utilization. CONCLUSIONS: GC prescription practices vary greatly among otolaryngologists. Drug choice appears to be driven primarily by clinician preference and personal experience rather than by specific pharmacologic or physiologic rationale. These findings likely reflect the current lack of well-constructed studies in the laryngology literature to guide GC selection and administration for benign disorders of the larynx and highlight an important potential area for future studies.

Objective To determine whether receiving funding from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts (CORE) grant program is associated with career choice (in terms of practice setting) and scholarly impact. Study Design and Setting Examination of bibliometrics among academic otolaryngologists, including CORE grants funding history. Methods An Internet search was conducted to determine the current practice setting and, for academic otolaryngologists, academic rank of individuals receiving CORE grants since 1985. The Scopus database was used to determine scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, and publication experience (in years) of these practitioners along with a "control" cohort of nonfunded academic otolaryngologists. Results Of 432 unique individuals receiving CORE grant funding since 1985, 44.4% are currently academicians. This cohort had a higher h-index (mean, 11.9; median, 10; interquartile range [IQR], 6-18) than their non-CORE grant-funded academic peers (mean, 9.2; median, 7; IQR, 3-13; P = .002) and colleagues who are not currently in academic practice (mean, 4.4; median, 3; IQR, 0-6; P < .001). CORE grant-funded academic otolaryngologists had a statistically higher scholarly impact on controlling for academic rank and among practitioners with greater than 10 years of publication experience. No statistical differences in academic promotion patterns were noted between those with and those without a CORE grant funding history. Conclusions Procurement of an AAO-HNSF CORE grant is associated with greater scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index. This relationship persists among practitioners with more than 10 years of publication experience, as well as upon comparison of CORE grant-funded and non-CORE grant-funded otolaryngologists at all academic ranks. Practitioners awarded these grants may be more likely to go into and remain in academic practice.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine litigation involving epistaxis and analyze factors that determine liability. METHODS: Jury verdicts and settlements regarding cases involving epistaxis were gathered utilizing the Westlaw database. Factors involved in litigation gathered included demographics, defendant specialty, procedure, alleged cause of malpractice, outcome, monetary award, and other variables. RESULTS: A total of 26 cases were analyzed. The majority of cases (57.7%) were decided in favor of the plaintiff or settled out of court. Total awards amounted to $24,501,252. Average awards for cases decided in favor of the plaintiff were $2,260,893 and ranged from $499,845 to $9,022,643. Settlements averaged $1,084,375 and ranged from $300,000 to $3,800,000. Common causes of malpractice encountered included delay in diagnosis, complications from medical procedures, and failure to recognize complications in a timely manner. CONCLUSION: Contrary to previous reports analyzing malpractice for varying medical procedures and complications, litigation in epistaxis is more commonly resolved in favor of the plaintiff or resolved through out-of-court settlements. Substantial financial awards and therapeutic complications from blindness to death make epistaxis a candidate for litigation. Of importance from a medicolegal stand is the fact that 30.8% (8) of the patients involved in epistaxis litigation died, either from complications of therapy or from experiencing epistaxis as a complication of another procedure/pathology. Using necessary diagnostic imaging, ensuring proper management techniques, and recognizing complications in a timely manner can serve to limit legal liability and enhance patient safety.