Anders Niklasson1, Kilian Gladiné2, Anton Rönnblom1, Magnus von Unge3,4,5, Joris Dirckx2, Krister Tano1. 1. Department of Clinical Science, Otorhinolaryngology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 2. Department of Physics, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 3. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 4. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 5. Centre for Clinical Research, Hospital of Vastmanland Vasteras, Region Vastmanland-Uppsala University, Vasteras, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare stapes vibrations in different partial ossicular replacement prosthesis (PORP) applications. METHODS: Stapedial vibrations were measured on fresh frozen human temporal bones with laser Doppler vibrometry. Eight different types of common ossiculoplasty methods were compared regarding recovery of stapes vibrations in relation with the normal ossicular chain. The PORPs were divided into three groups: 1) PORPs with the lateral contact only with the tympanic membrane, 2) PORPs with lateral contact only to the malleus handle, and 3) PORPs with lateral contact with both the malleus handle and the tympanic membrane. RESULTS: The PORPs with lateral contact only to the malleus handle performed better than the PORPs with lateral contact to the tympanic membrane only at 2 kHZ, but the best recovery was found in the group with contact both to the malleus handle and the tympanic membrane. CONCLUSION: The best sound transmission might be achieved by placing a PORP in contact with both the tympanic membrane and the handle of the malleus.
OBJECTIVE: To compare stapes vibrations in different partial ossicular replacement prosthesis (PORP) applications. METHODS: Stapedial vibrations were measured on fresh frozen human temporal bones with laser Doppler vibrometry. Eight different types of common ossiculoplasty methods were compared regarding recovery of stapes vibrations in relation with the normal ossicular chain. The PORPs were divided into three groups: 1) PORPs with the lateral contact only with the tympanic membrane, 2) PORPs with lateral contact only to the malleus handle, and 3) PORPs with lateral contact with both the malleus handle and the tympanic membrane. RESULTS: The PORPs with lateral contact only to the malleus handle performed better than the PORPs with lateral contact to the tympanic membrane only at 2 kHZ, but the best recovery was found in the group with contact both to the malleus handle and the tympanic membrane. CONCLUSION: The best sound transmission might be achieved by placing a PORP in contact with both the tympanic membrane and the handle of the malleus.