Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:43:22.629Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Synchronous ossiculoplasty with titanium prosthesis during canal wall down surgery for advanced cholesteatoma: anatomical and hearing outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2011

M Iseri ,
E Ustundag ,
A Ulubil ,
M Ozturk  and
O Bircan
M Iseri
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Turkey
E Ustundag
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Turkey
A Ulubil
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Turkey
M Ozturk*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Turkey
O Bircan
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Kocaeli University Medical Faculty, Turkey
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Murat Ozturk, Kocaeli Universitesi Tip Fakultesi, KBB Anabilim Dali, 41380 Umuttepe, Kocaeli, Turkey Fax: +90 262 3037003 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To analyse patients with cholesteatoma undergoing canal wall down mastoidectomy together with ossicular reconstruction with a titanium prosthesis, in order to identify factors associated with hearing outcomes.

Study design:

Retrospective review of 97 cases undergoing single-stage surgical management.

Methods:

All patients underwent canal wall down mastoidectomy. Kurz titanium ossicular prostheses were used for ossicular chain reconstruction. Pre-operative and post-operative air conduction and bone conduction hearing thresholds were obtained at 500, 1000, 2000 and 3000 Hz.

Results:

The mean pure tone average improved from 46.02 ± 14.54 dB pre-operatively to 29.32 ± 14.64 dB post-operatively, for both total and partial ossicular replacement prosthesis groups combined. The mean air–bone gap improved from 30.38 ± 11.12 dB pre-operatively to 15.62 ± 9.65 dB post-operatively, for both groups combined.

Conclusion:

Reconstruction with a titanium prosthesis offers good functional results when performed during canal wall down surgery for advanced cholesteatoma, as a single-stage procedure.

Keywords

OssiculoplastyProsthesisTitaniumMastoidectomyCholesteatoma
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 126 , Issue 2 , February 2012 , pp. 131 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2011

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.)

References

1Berenholz, LP, Rizer, FM, Burkey, JM, Schuring, AG, Lippy, WH. Ossiculoplasty in canal wall down mastoidectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;123:30–3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Cook, JA, Krishnan, S, Fagan, PA. Hearing results following modified versus canal-up mastoidectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1996;105:379–83CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Brown, JS. A ten year statistical follow-up of 1142 consecutive cases of cholesteatoma: the closed vs the open technique. Laryngoscope 1982;92:390–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Tos, M, Lau, T. Hearing after surgery for cholesteatoma using various techniques. Auris Nasus Larynx 1989;16:61–73CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Felek, SA, Islam, A, Celik, H, Demirci, M, Samim, E, Kose, K. The functional and anatomical results of the canal wall down tympanoplasty in extensive cholesteatoma. Acta Otolaryngol 2009;129:1388–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Young, M, Vowler, S. Long-term results in ossiculoplasty: an analysis of prognostic factors. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:874–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Vos, DC, Gersdorff, M, Gerard, JM. Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty. Otol Neurotol 2006;28:61–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Alaani, A, Raut, VV. Kurz titanium prosthesis ossiculoplasty – follow-up statistical analysis of factors affecting one year hearing results. Auris Nasus Larynx 2010;37:150–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Albu, S, Babighian, G, Trabalzini, F. Prognostic factors in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 1998;19:136–40Google ScholarPubMed
10Stankovic, MD. Audiologic results of surgery for cholesteatoma: short and long term follow-up of influential factors. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:933–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Kos, MI, Castrillon, R, Montandon, P, Guyot, JP. Anatomic and functional long-term results of canal wall-down mastoidectomy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2004;113:872–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Martin, TPC, Weller, MD, Kim, DS, Smith, MCF. Results of primary ossiculoplasty in ears with an intact stapes superstructure and malleus handle: inflammation in the middle ear at the time of surgery does not affect hearing outcomes. Clin Otolaryngol 2009;34:218–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Begall, K, Zimmermann, H. Titanium implants for the reconstruction of the ossicular chain. Results from a multi-centred study [in German]. Laryngootologie 2000;79:139–45Google Scholar
14Schmerber, S, Troussier, J, Dumas, G, Lavieille, JP, Nguyen, D. Hearing results with the titanium ossicular replacement prostheses. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2006;263:347–54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Ho, SY, Battista, RA, Wiet, RJ. Early results with titanium ossicular implants. Otol Neurotol 2003;24:149–52CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Gardner, EK, Jackson, CG, Kaylie, DM. Results with titanium ossicular reconstruction prostheses. Laryngoscope 2004;114:65–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed