Comparison with Hearing Gains by the Different Methods of Operation in the Defect of Malleus and Incus.
- Author:
Bo Hyung KIM
1
;
Geun Soo LEE
;
Jae Myeon RYU
;
Young Chan CHO
;
Dae Hyeon OH
;
Sung Ho KANG
;
Dae Jun LIM
Author Information
1. Department of Otolaryngology, College of Medicine, Konkuk University, Cheongju, Korea. bhkim@kku.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Otitis media;
Ossicular replacement
- MeSH:
Cartilage;
Ear, Middle;
Hearing*;
Incus*;
Malleus*;
Ossicular Prosthesis;
Ossicular Replacement;
Otitis Media;
Retrospective Studies
- From:Korean Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
2003;46(7):555-558
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Multiple techniques of ossicular replacement have been advocated for hearing gain in the setting of chronic otitis media. The purpose of this study is to investigate hearing gain in the middle ear surgery according to the surgical technique and the materials. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Ninety-nine cases with ossicular replacement with mastoidectomy in the Konkuk University Hospital from 1995 to 2001 were reviewed retrospectively. Postoperative hearing gains were compared with the two methods of mastoidectomy and the two materials of ossicular replacement separately. RESULTS: A successful hearing gain was defined as a postoperative air-bone gap less than 30dB. According to this criterion, 47% of intact canal wall mastoidectomy cases and 43% of open cavity mastoidectomy cases were successful. Thirty-one percent of ossicular replacement case using cartilage-perichondrium and 62% using hydroxyapatite-PORP were successful. The extrusion rate was zero % in ossicular replacement using cartilage-perichondrium, and 57% in ossicular replacement using PORP. CONCLUSION: There was a significant differences in hearing gain and extrusion rate by using two different materials for ossicular replacement such as cartilage and hydroxyapatite-PORP (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant differences in hearing gain between the two methods of mastoidectomy (p>0.05).
