Literature DB >> 18607302

Titanium versus nontitanium prostheses in ossiculoplasty.

Charles S Coffey1, Fu-Shing Lee, Paul R Lambert.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the hearing outcomes and complications observed using either titanium or nontitanium prostheses in a 7-year consecutive series of ossiculoplasties performed by a single surgeon. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective.
METHODS: : A database of ossicular reconstruction surgeries was reviewed for preoperative and postoperative audiometric data including air and bone conduction thresholds at four frequencies and speech reception thresholds. Outcomes were evaluated at time points less than and greater than 6 months postoperatively. Baseline demographic and surgical characteristics and postoperative complications were also noted.
RESULTS: A total of 105 cases had sufficient audiometric data available for analysis, including 80 performed with titanium and 25 with nontitanium implants. Follow-up ranged from 1.2 to 74.2 months, with a mean of 14.9 months. Mean air-bone gap at initial follow-up was 21.7 dB in the nontitanium group and 15.4 dB in the titanium group; this difference was significant (P = .01). Postoperative air-bone gap of less than 20 dB at initial follow-up was achieved in 50.0% of nontitanium cases and 77.1% of titanium cases (P = .012). This difference in "success" rates persisted at longer follow-up but did not achieve statistical significance. Mean speech reception thresholds at <6 months was 29.7 dB in the nontitanium group and 22.6 dB in the titanium group (P = .049). Extrusion was observed with two nontitanium prostheses (8.0%) and three titanium prostheses (3.8%) (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Titanium ossicular prostheses provide hearing outcomes superior to those of nontitanium prostheses when evaluated within 6 months after ossiculoplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18607302     DOI: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e31817bd807

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  6 in total

1.  PORP vs. TORP: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Huiqian Yu; Yingzi He; Yusu Ni; Yunfeng Wang; Na Lu; Huawei Li
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Short-term hearing results using ossicular replacement prostheses of hydroxyapatite versus titanium.

Authors:  Jong-Ik Lee; Shin-Hyuk Yoo; Chang Wook Lee; Chan Il Song; Myung Hoon Yoo; Hong Ju Park
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Influence of Surface Processing on the Biocompatibility of Titanium.

Authors:  Kornelia Wirsching; Karla Lehle; Peter Jacob; Otto Gleich; Jürgen Strutz; Pingling Kwok
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 3.623

4.  Long-term histological results of ossicular chain reconstruction using bioceramic implants.

Authors:  Horia Mocanu; Adela-Ioana Mocanu; Ana Miruna Drăgoi; Marian Rădulescu
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 2.447

5.  Comparison of Titanium versus Polycel as Partial Ossicular Replacement Prosthesis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Mohammad Faramarzi; Masih Tale; Sheida Khosravaniardakani; Sareh Roosta; Ali Faramarzi
Journal:  Iran J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-05

6.  Comparison of Titanium vs. Polycel Total Ossicular Replacement Prosthesis.

Authors:  Mohammad Faramarzi; Reza Jahangiri; Sareh Roosta
Journal:  Iran J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-03
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.