Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T00:41:44.084Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Autologous incus versus titanium partial ossicular replacement prosthesis in reconstruction of Austin type A ossicular defects: a prospective randomised clinical trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2017

Naragund Amith*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi, India
Mudhol RS
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi, India
*
Address for correspondence: Dr A Naragund, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, KLE University, Belagavi, Karnataka, India E-mail: amitnargund@rediffmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

This study aimed to compare the functional and anatomical outcomes of ossiculoplasty using an autograft incus or a titanium partial ossicular replacement prosthesis for reconstructing Austin type A ossicular defects.

Methods:

Patients with Austin A ossicular defects were randomly divided into two groups: one group underwent ossiculoplasty with an autologous incus (the autologous incus group) and the other underwent ossiculoplasty with a titanium partial ossicular replacement prosthesis (the titanium prosthesis group). Otoscopic examination and audiological assessment was done pre-operatively and at 3, 6 and 12 months post-operatively.

Results:

A post-operative average air–bone gap closure of less than 20 dB was seen in 13 patients (65 per cent) in the autologous incus group and 7 (35 per cent) in the titanium prosthesis group. There were fewer post-operative complications in the autologous incus group (20 per cent) than in the titanium prosthesis group (45 per cent).

Conclusion:

Hearing outcomes and graft take up after ossiculoplasty were significantly better when an autologous incus rather than a titanium partial ossicular replacement prosthesis was used to reconstruct Austin type A ossicular defects. The major disadvantages of the titanium prosthesis were unpredictable results and more post-operative complications.

Information

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2017 
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Photograph showing a socket being drilled with a 0.6-mm diamond burr into the remnant of the long process of incus for engaging the stapes head.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 Photograph showing a notch made with 0.6-mm diamond burr over the body of incus to fit the handle of the malleus.

Figure 2

Fig. 3 Photograph showing the refashioned incus (I) interposed between the handle of the malleus (M) and the stapes head (S).

Figure 3

Fig. 4 Photograph showing a titanium partial ossicular replacement prosthesis (PORP) placed between the handle of the malleus (M) and the stapes superstructure (S).

Figure 4

Table I Basic parameters for both groups

Figure 5

Table II Average post-operative hearing in both groups

Figure 6

Fig. 5 Graph comparing hearing outcomes between patient groups in terms of the air–bone gap (ABG) closure. *Successful hearing gain. Ti = titanium; PORP = partial ossicular replacement prosthesis

Figure 7

Fig. 6 Graph showing hearing outcomes at 3, 6 and 12 months after ossiculoplasty in patients in the autologous incus group. ABG = air–bone gap

Figure 8

Fig. 7 Graph comparing hearing outcomes at 3, 6 and 12 months after ossiculoplasty in patients in the titanium partial ossicular replacement prosthesis group. ABG = air–bone gap

Figure 9

Table III Hearing outcome by type of mastoid surgery

Figure 10

Table IV Post-operative complication rates in both groups