Author Topic: Translab vs. Middle Fossa  (Read 9130 times)

Larry

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1464
  • Scallywags Rule
    • Chronologer of the PBW
Re: Translab vs. Middle Fossa
« Reply #15 on: September 22, 2006, 05:21:19 am »
My turn,

Sorry, but I am going to throw a different perspective on your possible surgery.

I had middle fossa almost 4 years ago and apart from having chronic headaches since (never had any before surgery), my AN has grown back. Now my situation may be a case of poor surgeon, I don't know. I changed to the leading surgeon in Sydney who now tells me that based on a study in Denmark (I think), he is no longer doing middle fossa because of the complications and also the inability to "get a good look" at the growth. It is meant to be less invasive than Trans Lab but Trans Lab enables a better look and approach to the growth. The problem here is that Trans Lab guarantees total hearing loss in that ear. Middle Fossa will preserve the hearing you have, less a bit.

Tough choice. My specialist tells me the headaches from middle fossa surgery are due to the trauma inflicted on the muscles and bone when cutting etc.

My preference is certainly GK.


Laz
2.0cm AN removed Nov 2002.
Dr Chang St Vincents, Sydney
Australia. Regrowth discovered
Nov 2005. Watch and wait until 2010 when I had radiotherapy. 20% shrinkage and no change since - You beauty
Chronologer of the PBW
http://www.frappr.com/laz