Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Laryngoscope. 2018 Aug;128(8):1922-1926. doi: 10.1002/lary.27021. Epub 2017 Nov 24.

Does the diameter of the stapes prosthesis really matter? A prospective clinical study.

Author information

1
Department of Otolaryngology, Unit of Otology, Auditory implants and Skull base surgery, Public Assistance-Paris Hospital, Pitié-Salpêtrière Group Hospital, Paris, France.
2
Minimally Invasive Surgical Robotic Rehabilitation of Hearing, French Institute of Health and Medical Research, Mixed Unit of Research-S 1159, Paris, France.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS:

To evaluate the influence of the diameter of stapes prosthesis on functional outcomes in stapes surgery.

STUDY DESIGN:

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS:

Fifty consecutive small fenestra stapedotomies performed using a 0.4-mm-diameter prosthesis were compared with 50 consecutive small fenestra stapedotomies carried out using a 0.6-mm-diameter piston. Audiological assessment following the recommendations of the Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium was performed 1 month after surgery. Postoperative complications between the two groups were noted.

RESULTS:

There were no statistically significant differences in demographic data between the two groups, and no differences in preoperative bone-conduction (BC) or air-conduction (AC) hearing thresholds for all frequencies (analysis of variance [ANOVA] and χ2 tests). No differences were found in the mean preoperative BC and AC pure-tone average and air-bone gap (ABG). In the postoperative evaluation, a statistically significant difference was found for the mean AC gain (20 ± 8.7 vs. 24 ± 11.5, P = .042, ANOVA) as well as for the postoperative AC threshold at 0.125 and 0.25 kHz and the postoperative BC threshold at 0.25 kHz (P < .01, ANOVA). A postoperative ABG ≤10 dB was obtained in 90% and 94% of patients in the 0.4-mm- and 0.6-mm-diameter piston groups, respectively (difference not significant, χ2 test). No postoperative dead ear and/or sensorineural hearing loss was noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS:

The 0.6-mm piston allowed a statistically significant higher AC gain compared with the 0.4-mm diameter piston. A larger diameter piston may be preferable if there are no anatomical or technical reasons that would favor a smaller prosthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

2b Laryngoscope, 1922-1926, 2018.

KEYWORDS:

Otosclerosis; laser; middle ear; nitinol; piston

PMID:
29171673
DOI:
10.1002/lary.27021
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center