Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2010, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (25): 4594-4598.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8225.2010.25.009

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis versus hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis for repair of auditory ossiclar injury

Gao Hong1, Jiang Xue-jun2, Yang Hui-jun2   

  1. 1 Otorhinolaryngologic Department, Shenyang Fifth People's Hospital, Shenyang  110023, Liaoning Province, China; 2 Department of Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang   110001, Liaoning Province, China
  • Online:2010-06-18 Published:2010-06-18
  • Contact: Jiang Xue-jun, Doctor, Professor, Chief physician, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110001, Liaoning Province, China
  • About author:Gao Hong★, Master, Associate chief physician, Otorhinolaryngologic Department, Shenyang Fifth People's Hospital, Shenyang 110023, Liaoning Province, China sygaohong@sina.com

PDF

386

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis is usually applied to reconstruct ossicular chain. Recently, hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis has been widely used for clinical practice of tympanoplasty. There are no current studies reporting the clinical efficacy of homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis and hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis in tympanoplasty and reconstruction of ossicular chain.
OBJECTIVE: To find a suitable ossicular prosthesis by comparing the clinical effect of homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis and hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis.
METHODS: Sixty patients with chronic otitis media undergoing tympanoplasty and reconstruction of ossicular chain were divided into homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis group and hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis group. Two groups were subjected to pure tone testing before and after surgery. The average hearing threshold air conduction and the average air-bone gap were calculated in speech frequency area (0.5, 1.0, 2.0 kHz), the hearing results of last recheck (at least 6 months later) served as one of the indicators for comparisons between the two groups. The tympanic membrane healing of two groups of cases was recorded, that is the time for epithelium of graft tympanic membrane, the extrusion rate of ossicular prosthesis in two groups was also recorded.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: As for patients with the same lesion type and the same surgical approach, the hearing improvement did not differ significantly between the homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis and hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis (P > 0.05). The healing of tympanic membrane was not significantly different (P > 0.05). The ratio of ossicular prosthesis exodus was 0% in both homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis and hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis. The homologous cartilage ossicular prosthesis has similar clinical effect with hydroxyapatite ossicular prosthesis for tympanoplasty and reconstruction of ossicular chain.

CLC Number: