Ayşegül Verim, Engin Başer, Murat Haluk Özkul, Ömer Faruk Çalım, Alper Yenigün, Gamze Didem Kılıç, Husamettin Yaşar

Titanyum Protezlerle Yapılan Timpanoplastide Prognostik Faktörlerin Değerlendirilmesi

Amaç: Bu çalışmada evrensel titanyum protezler kullanılarak ossiküloplasti yapılan hastalarda ameliyat öncesi ölçülen orta kulak risk indeksi (OKRİ) ve intraoperatif kemikçik zinciri bulgularının postoperatif işitme üzerine etkilerini değerlendirmek amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmaya inkusu arızalı olup evrensel titanyum protez kullanılarak kulak cerrahisi yapılan hastalar dahil edildi. Preoperatif kulak muayenesi sonuçları, OKRİ skorları ve ameliyat bulguları değerlendirildi. Preoperatif ve postoperatif hava iletimi ve kemik iletimi işitme eşikleri ve hava-kemik aralığı 0,5, 1, 2 ve 4 kHz frekanslarında değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Çekiç kemiği ve üzengi suprastrüktürü varlığının ve prognostik OKRİ derecelendirmesinin rekonstrüksiyon başarı oranını etkilediği görüldü. Hava-kemik aralığı sonuçları hafif, orta ve ağır OKRİ gruplarında sırasıyla %100, %87,5 ve %12,5 olarak tespit edildi. Tartışma ve Sonuç: Literatürle uyumlu olarak, preoperatif OKRİ skorlarının cerrahlara ossiküloplasti sırasında rehberlik ederek hastaya özel operasyon stratejisi geliştirmede yardımcı olabileceği görülmüştür.

An Evaluation of Prognostic Factors in Tympanoplasty with Titanium Prostheses

Aim: This study aimed to assess the effects of preoperatively measured middle ear riskindex (MERI) and intraoperative ossicular chain findings on postoperative hearing in patients who underwent ossiculoplasty performed by using universal titanium prostheses.Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent ear surgery using universal titaniumprostheses due to malfunctioning in the incus were included. Preoperative ear examination results, surgical findings, and MERI scores were assessed. Preoperative and postoperative air-conduction and bone-conduction hearing thresholds and air-bone gap wereassessed at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz frequencies.Results: We found that presence of the malleus and stapes suprastructure and prognosticMERI grading affected the reconstruction success rate. The air-bone gap results werefound to be 100%, 87.5% and 12.5% in the mild, moderate, and severe MERI groups, respectively.Discussion and Conclusion: In line with the literature, we observed that preoperative MERIscoring might help surgeons develop a patient-specific operation strategy by providingguidance during ossiculoplasty.

PDF

___

1. Wullstein H. Theory and practice of tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1956;66:1076.
2. Zöllner F. Technik der Formung einer Columella aus Knochen. Z. Laryng. Rhinol. 1960;39:536–40.
3. Smyth CD. Surgical management of cholesteatoma. The role of staging in closed operations. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1988;97(6):667–9.
4. Black B. Ossiculoplasty prognosis: the SPITE method of assessment. Am J Otol. 1992;13:544–51.
5. Dornhoffer JL, Gardner E. Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty: a statistical staging system. Otol Neurotol. 2001;22:299–304.
6. Kartush JM. Ossicular chain reconstruction: capitulum to malleus. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1994;27:689– 715.
7. Becvarovski Z, Kartush JM. Smoking and tympanoplasty: implications for prognosis and the Middle Ear Risk Index (MERI). Laryngoscope. 2001;111:1806–11.
8. Manning SC, Cantekin EI, Kenna MA, Blue- stone CD. Prognostic value of Eustachian tube function in pediatric tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1987;97:1012–6.
9. Albu S, Babighian G, Trabalzini F. Prognostic factors in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol. 1998;19:136–40.
10. Brackmann DE, Sheehy JL. Tympanoplasty TORPs and PORPs. Laryngoscope. 1979;89:108–14.
11. Jackson CG, Glasscock ME, Schwaber MK, Schwaber MK, Nissen AJ, Christiansen SG, et al. Ossicular chain reconstruction: the TORP and PORP in chronic ear disease. Laryngoscope. 1983;93:981–8.
12. Sakai M. Proposal of a guideline in reporting hearing in middle ear and mastoid surgery. Am J Otol. 1994;15:291–3.
13. Maassen MM, Zenner HP. Tympanoplasty type 2 with ionomeric cement and titanium-gold-angle prostheses. Am J Otol. 1998;19:693–9.
14. Austin DF. Ossicular reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol. 1971;94:525–35.
15. Brackmann DE, Sheehy JL, Luxford WM. TORPs and PORPs in tympanoplasty: a review of 1042 operations. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1984;92:32–7.
16. Goldenberg R. Hydroxylapatite ossicular replacement prostheses: preliminary results. Laryngoscope. 1990;100:693–700.
17. De Vos C, Gersdorff M, Gérard JM. Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty. Otol Neurotol. 2006;28:61–7.
18. Yung M, Vowler S. Long-term results in ossiculoplasty: an analysis of prognostic factors. Otol Neurotol. 2006;27:874–881.
19. Bared A, Angeli SI. Malleus handle: determinant of success in ossiculoplasty. Am J Otol. 2010;31:235–40.
20. Pinar E, Sadullahoglu K, Calli C, Oncel S. Evaluation of prognostic factors and middle ear risk index in tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;139:386– 390.
21. Emir H, Kizilkaya Kaptan Z, Göcmen H, Uzunkulaoglu H, Tuzuner A, Bayiz U, et al. Ossiculoplasty with intact stapes: analysis of hearing results according to the middle ear risk index. Acta Otolaryngol. 2009;29:1088–94.
22. “Silverstein H, McDaniel AB, Lichtenstein R. A comparison of PORP, TORP and incus homograft for ossicular reconstruction in chronic ear surgery. Presented at The Triological Society, Miami Beach, Florida, May 25, 1985.”
23. Sheehy JL. TORPs and PORPs: causes of failure: a report on 446 operations. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1984;92:583–7.
24. Sheehy JL, Crabtree JA. Tympanoplasty: staging the operation. Laryngoscope. 1973;83:1594–21.
25. Bojrab OI, Causse JB, Battista RA, et al. Ossiculoplasty with composite prosthesis. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1994;27:759–76.
26. Vrabec JT, Stierman K, Grady JJ. Hydroxyapatite prosthesis exclusion. Otol Neurotol 2002;23:653–6.
27. Truy E, Naiman AN, Pavillon C, Abedipour D, LinaGranade G, Rabilloud M. Hydroxyapatite versus titanium ossiculoplasty. Otol Neurotol. 2007;28:492–8.
28. Zeitler DM, Lalwani AK. Are postoperative hearing results better with titanium ossicular reconstruction prostheses? Laryngoscope. 2010;120:2–3.