Extracción de la cera de los oídos / Extraction of wax from the ear

A través de cuatro artículos sucesivos pretendemos mostrar los procedimientos que consideramos de mayor utilidad para el diagnóstico y el seguimiento de la otitis media serosa (OMS) por parte de Pediatría de Atención Primaria. En este primero, expondremos la que, a nuestro juicio, es la manera más eficaz de limpiar la cera del oído de un niño. Las conclusiones aportadas conjugan las recomendaciones ofrecidas por las principales guías sobre extracción de cera del oído y las de la revisión bibliográfica efectuada, con la experiencia de un equipo de pediatras y de otorrinolaringólogos de la misma área de salud. Alrededor de un 50% de niños requieren limpiar de cera sus oídos a fin de realizar una correcta otoscopia. Para ello podemos utilizar la instilación de cerumenolíticos, la irrigación, la extracción manual o cualquier combinación. No existe evidencia en la bibliografía de que un procedimiento sea mejor que otro. Conclusiones: tras aplicar las diferentes técnicas de limpieza, consideramos que, si la cera es externa y el conducto auditivo permeable, la mejor manera de eliminarla es mediante el uso de curetas o porta-algodones, pero si la cera es más profunda o está impactada, el método elegido será el lavado con irrigación de agua templada, para lo que un cerumenolítico aplicado previamente es de gran ayuda. Aconsejamos realizar dicha irrigación con una jeringa de 20 cc y un catéter intravenoso Abocat® del 14-16, a fin de evitar riesgos (AU)

Through four successive articles we aim to show the procedures we consider to be most useful for the diagnosis and follow-up of otitis media with effusion (OME) by Primary care Pediatrics. In the first one, we expose what we believe is the best way to clean wax from the ear of a child. The conclusions provided combine the recommendations offered by the main guides on extraction of wax from the ear and the literature review carried out, with the experience of a team of pediatricians and otolaryngologists from the same Healthcare Area. Around 50% of children require clean wax from their ears in order to perform a correct otoscopy. To do this we can use the instillation of cerumenolytics, irrigation, manual removal, or any combination. There is no evidence in the literature that a procedure is better than another one. Conclusions: after applying different cleaning techniques, we believe that if the wax is external and the ear canal permeable, the best way to remove it is by the use of blunt ear curettes or applicator with triangular tip, but if the wax is deeper or is impacted, the better choice will be washing with warm water irrigation, in this case, the previous application of a cerumenolytic will be of great help. We advise to perform such irrigation with a syringe of 20 cc and an intravenous catheter Abocat® 14-16, in order to avoid risks (AU)

A new approach for cerumenolytic treatment in children: In vivo and in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the effects of various cerumenolytic solutions in vivo and in vitro and to measure the change in pain following treatment. METHODS: The study was done as a single-centre, prospective and double-blind study. Among 1243 paediatric patients with total or nearly total occlusive plug in 4 years period, those who accepted endoscopic ear examination and cleaning via aspiration after a follow-up period of at least 10 days following treatment were included in the study. Day of total TM visualisation was noted and removal co-efficient was calculated. The pre and post-treatment pain levels of the patients were assessed using analogue chromatic continuous scale (ACCS). In the in vitro part, cerumen samples collected at equal amounts from 20 patients were treated at 36-400°C in 6 different tubes with the same solutions and their dissolution degrees were assessed over a period of 5 days (Hour 6, Hour 12, Hour 48, Hour 72, Hour 92, Hour 120). Additionally, the degree of resolution in the tube treated with distilled water was considered to be the control reference. RESULTS: In the in vivo part of the study, total TM visualisation was observed in Group 1 at 50.2% (Day 3), in Group at 57.1%, in Group at 62.3%, in Group at 44.3% and in Group 5 at 73.5%. The group with the lowest removal co-efficient was Group 5 (removal co-efficient=1.623). In reference to the ACCS pain scores of the patients, the intra-group change pre-post treatment was found statistically significant for all groups (p=0.008; p=0.0222; p=0.005; p=0.026; p=0.018). After statistical analysis between the groups the difference between Group 5 and other groups was found statistically significant (p=0.002; p=0.026; p=0.044; p=0.034). In the in vitro part of the study, the best dissolution was observed in Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the best cerumenolytic solutions were identified to be glycerine 10cc+3% hydrogen peroxide 10cc+10% sodium bicarbonate 10cc+distilled water 10cc. Especially the use of this mixture ease in terms of pain for the patient and in terms of time and comfort for the physician during the removal procedure.

Finding the most effective cerumenolytic.

AIM: To conduct an in-vitro study to determine the most effective topical cerumenolytic. METHOD: Cerumen was collected from patients who attended the ENT out-patient clinic. The collected cerumen was formed into a homogeneous ball. Discs of wax were punched out and weighed to create samples of uniform shape and size. Each cerumen sample was placed in a tube which contained one of six test solutions. The tubes were observed at specific time points. Digital photographs were taken to record the degree of cerumen disintegration. The cerumen discs were then removed from the solutions, dried and re-weighed. RESULTS: Distilled water caused the greatest reduction in the mass of the cerumen disc. Cerumen placed in distilled water and in sodium bicarbonate solution showed substantial disintegration at 12 hours. Cerumen placed in solutions containing oil-based agents showed no visible sign of disintegration and no reduction in dried weight. CONCLUSION: Distilled water resulted in the greatest degree of cerumenolysis. Oil-based cerumenolytics were ineffective.

Cerumen removal: comparison of cerumenolytic agents and effect on cognition among the elderly.

Cerumen impaction may affect hearing and decrease hearing acuity, thus decreasing cognitive functions among the elderly. The objective of this study was to compare the safety and the efficacy of three cerumenolytic agents and to assess the effect of cerumen removal on cognition. Thirty eight elderly subjects (mean age: 78 years, total 76 ears) were treated with either Auro®, Cerumol® or the newer CleanEars®, and the change in the degree of ear canal occlusion was examined after a week. In addition, a change in cognition following cerumen removal was evaluated using Raven's standard progressive matrices (RSPM) test. There was no difference regarding the eventual degree of occlusion between the three treatment groups. Only in the CleanEars® group a complete resolution of obstruction in both ears was achieved. A statistically significant difference between the RSPM score before and after the removal of cerumen was found. Using CleanEars® is as effective and safe as other agents and may be advantageous due to its spray application. Removal of cerumen significantly improves the well-being of elderly patients.