Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:05:01.457Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparing intermediate-term hearing results of NiTiBOND and Nitinol prostheses in stapes surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2021

A Koukkoullis ,
I Gerlinger ,
A Kovács ,
Z Szakács ,
Z Piski ,
I Szanyi ,
I Tóth  and
P Révész
A Koukkoullis
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
I Gerlinger
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
A Kovács
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
Z Szakács
Affiliation:
Institute for Translational Medicine, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
Z Piski
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
I Szanyi
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
I Tóth
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
P Révész*
Affiliation:
ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary
*
Author for correspondence: Dr P Révész, ENT Department, Clinical Centre, Medical School, University of Pécs, Munkácsy Mihály u. 2, 7621 Pécs, Hungary E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To statistically analyse the hearing thresholds of two cohorts undergoing stapedotomy for otosclerosis with two different prostheses.

Method

A retrospective study was conducted comparing NiTiBOND (n = 53) and Nitinol (n = 38) prostheses.

Results

Average follow-up duration was 4.1 years for NiTiBOND and 4.4 years for Nitinol prostheses. The post-operative air–bone gap was 10 dB or less, indicating clinical success. The p-values for differences between (1) pre- and post-operative values in the NiTiBOND group, (2) pre- and post-operative values in the Nitinol group, (3) pre-operative values and (4) post-operative values in the two groups were: air–bone gap – p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.631 and p = 0.647; four-frequency bone conduction threshold – p = 0.076, p = 0.129, p < 0.001 and p = 0.005; four-frequency air conduction threshold – p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.043 and p = 0.041; three-frequency (1, 2 and 4 kHz) bone conduction threshold pre-operatively – p = 0.639, p = 0.495, p = 0.001 and p = 0.01; and air conduction threshold at 4 kHz: – p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.03 and p = 0.058.

Conclusion

Post-operative audiological outcomes for NiTiBOND and Nitinol were comparable.

Keywords

LasersNitinolOtosclerosisStapes FixationStapes Surgery
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 135 , Issue 9 , September 2021 , pp. 795 - 798
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Dr P Révész takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Rogue, Reis L, Donato, M, Almeida, G, Castelhano, L, Escada, P. Nitinol versus non-Nitinol prostheses in otosclerosis surgery: a meta-analysis. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2018;38:279–85Google Scholar
Wegner, I, Swartz, JE, Bance, ML, Grolman, W. A systematic review of the effect of different crimping techniques in stapes surgery for otosclerosis. Laryngoscope 2016;126:1207–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huber, AM, Schrepfer, T, Eiber, A. Clinical evaluation of the NiTiBOND stapes prosthesis, and optimized shape memory alloy design. Otol Neurotol 2012;33:132–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurz. NiTiBOND Stapes Prosthesis. In: https://www.kurzmed.com/en/products/otologie/stapedioplasty/nitibond-stapes-prosthesis [5 February 2020]Google Scholar
Gerlinger, I, Bakó, P, Piski, Z, Révész, P, Ráth, G, Karosi, T et al. KTP laser stapedotomy with a self-crimping, thermal shape memory Nitinol piston: follow-up study reporting intermediate-term hearing. Eur Arch Otorhinolaringol 2014;271:3171–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
STROBE statement. In: https://strobe-statement.org/index.php?id=strobe-aims [1 September 2014]Google Scholar
American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery. Committee of Hearing and Equilibrium Guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;113:186–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Révész, P, Szanyi, I, Ráth, G, Bocskai, T, Lujber, L, Piski, Z et al. Comparison of hearing results following the use of NiTiBOND versus Nitinol prostheses in stapes surgery: a retrospective controlled study reporting short-term postoperative results. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273:1131–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, JD Jr, McElveen, JT Jr. Next generation shape memory prosthesis (NiTiBOND) for stapedotomy: short-term results. Laryngoscope 2017;127:915–20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roosli, C, Huber, AM. Mid-term results after a newly designed nitinol stapes prosthesis use in 46 patients. Otol Neurotol 2013;34:61–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heywood, RL, Quick, ME, Atlas, MD. Long-term audiometric and clinical outcomes following stapedectomy with the shape memory nitinol stapes prosthesis. Otol Neurotol 2019;40:164–7010.1097/MAO.0000000000002069CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavy, J, Khalil, S. Five-year hearing results with the shape memory nitinol stapes prosthesis. Laryngoscope 2014;124:2591–3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rajan, GP, Diaz, J, Blackham, R, Eikelboom, RH, Atlas, MD, Shelton, C et al. Eliminating the limitations of manual crimping in stapes surgery: mid-term results of 90 patients in the nitinol stapes piston multicenter trial. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1236–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, KD, Gantz, BJ. Hearing results after stapedotomy with a nitinol piston prosthesis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007;133:758–62CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knox, GW, Reitan, H. Shape-memory stapes prosthesis for otosclerosis surgery. Laryngoscope 2005;115:1340–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Es-Souni, M, Es-Souni, M, Fischer-Brandies, H. Assessing the biocompatibility of NiTi shape memory alloys used for medical applications. Anal Bioanal Chem 2005;381:557–67CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shabalovskaya, SA. Surface, corrosion and biocompatibility aspects of Nitinol as an implant material. Biomed Mater Eng 2002;12:69–109Google ScholarPubMed