Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-x5fd4 Total loading time: 12.238 Render date: 2021-02-26T02:17:42.576Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

A comparison of the user-friendliness of hydroxyapatite and titanium ossicular prostheses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2006

M. W. Yung
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
C. Brewis
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, The Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust, Ipswich, UK.
Get access

Abstract

Both hydroxyapatite (Ha) and titanium (Ti) are well-accepted alloplastic materials for ossicular prostheses. Many different designs of Ha and Ti prostheses are presently available. Fourteen surgeons of different seniority and surgical experience were asked to ‘test-drive’ four different types of ossicular prostheses in cadaveric temporal bones to investigate the user-friendliness of these protheses. The Goldenberg design Ha incus prosthesis and the Dusseldorf design Bell Ti prosthesis were used as partial ossicular replacement prostheses (PORP). The Richards design Ha incus-stapes prosthesis and the Dusseldorf design Aerial Ti prosthesis were used as a total ossicular replacement prostheses (TORP). Nine out of 14 surgeons found the Ha PORP to be more user-friendly because of the notch design in the head. The Ti prosthesis was found to be more difficult to manipulate because it was too light. Half of the surgeons preferred the Ti TORP because of the open design of the top-plate. The Ha TORP was thought to be too top-heavy and to have a tendency to fall over.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Royal Society of Medicine Press Limited 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 16 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 26th February 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A comparison of the user-friendliness of hydroxyapatite and titanium ossicular prostheses
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

A comparison of the user-friendliness of hydroxyapatite and titanium ossicular prostheses
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

A comparison of the user-friendliness of hydroxyapatite and titanium ossicular prostheses
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *