Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

History of Ossicular Chain Reconstruction

  • Ossicular Chain Reconstruction (A Rivas and N Manzoor, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Otorhinolaryngology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Ossicular erosion is a well-known complication of chronic ear disease, particularly when associated with cholesteatoma. Discontinuity of the ossicular chain can result in varying degrees of conductive hearing loss. Surgical correction and rehabilitation through ossiculoplasty has long been described as a successful means of hearing rehabilitation. Since its original description, numerous advancements have been made, particularly in the sector of prosthesis design and development.

Recent Findings

Since the original ossicular chain reconstruction (OCR) was first described in 1952, various allografts, autografts, and homografts have all been utilized as ossicular prostheses. Since no one graft material was deemed superior to the others, grafts from each subtype were developed and implemented contemporaneously. While homografts lost popularity in the 1980s following concerns of disease transmission, they continue to have concentrated areas of use outside of the USA and Europe. Alternatively, autograft and allografts remain popular interposition mediums. Each has continued to evolve since their first description.

Summary

Ossiculoplasty has evolved dramatically over the past 70 years. Marked advances in ossicular prosthesis design as well as improvements in bio-inert materials have heralded in new possibilities in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of conductive hearing loss.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zöllner F. Principles of plastic surgery of the sound conduction apparatus. J Laryngol Otol. 1955;69:637–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wullstein H. Theory and practice of tympanotoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1956;66:1076–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. House HP. Polyethylene in middle ear surgery. Arch Otolaryngol. 1960;71(6):926–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Shambaugh GE. Developmental anomalies of the sound conduction apparatus and their surgical correction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1952;61(3):873–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Withers BT, Hatfield SE, Richmond RW. Drum and middle ear grafts in cats. Laryngoscope. 1963;73:1022–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Janeke JB, Shea JJ. Self-stabilizing proplast total ossicular replacement prosthesis in tympnoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1975;85(9):1550–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Shea JJ. Plastipore total ossicular replacement prosthesis. Laryngoscope. 1976;86(2):239–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Portmann M, Bebear JP, Bagot d’Arc M, et al. Ossicular prosthesis in functional surgery of the ear (proplast, plastipore and ceramics). Clinical audiometric results apropos of 214 cases. An Otorrinolaringol Ibero Am. 1984;11(2):127–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Grote J. Tympanoplasty with calcium phosphate. Arch Otolaryngol. 1984;110:197–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Grote JJ, Kuypers W. Use of biomaterials in reconstructive middle ear surgery. In: Rubin LR, editor. Biomaterials in reconstructive surgery. St Louis: CV Mosby Co; 1983. p. 987–95.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Palva T, Palva A, Karja J. Results with 2- or 3-legged wire columellization in chronic ear surgery. Ann Otol. 1971;80:760–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Dalchow CV, Grun D, Stupp HF. Reconstruction of the ossicular chain with titanium implants. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;125:628–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hall A, Rytzner C. Vitality of auto-transplanted ossicles. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 1960;158(52):334–40.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bell HL. A technique of tympanoplasty (tympanomalleolar stapediopexy). Laryngoscope. 1958;68(5):883–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hough JVD. Incudostapedial joint separation: etiology, treatment and significance. Laryngoscope. 1959;69(6):644–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Pulec JL, Sheehy JJ. Symposium on tympanoplasty: ossicular chain reconstruction. Laryngoscope. 1973;83(4):448–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Millls RP, Phill M. The use of cortical bone grafts in ossiculoplasty I: surgical techniches and hearing results. J Laryngol Otol. 1993;107(8):686–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. House WF, Patterson ME, Linthicum FH Jr. Incus homograft in chronic ear surgery. Arch Otolaryngol. 1966;84(2):148–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wehrs RE. Results of homografts in middle ear surgery. Laryngoscope. 1978;88(5):808–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Jansen C. Cartilage – tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1963;73:1288–301.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Iwanaga M, Mori H, Yamamoto E, Toda Y, Fukumoto M. The fate of homologous nasal septal cartilages in tympanoplasty. Acta Otolaryngol. 1986;101(3–4):306–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kerr AG, Byrne JE, Smyth GD. Cartilage homograft in the middle ear: a long term histologic study. J Laryngol Otol. 1973;87:1193–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Glascock ME, Jackson CG, Knox GW. Can acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and Cretzfeld-Jackob disease be transmitted via otologic homografts. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988;114(11):1252–5.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lubbe D, Fagan JJ. Revisiting the risks involved in using homograft ossicles in otologic surgery. J Laryngol Otol. 2008;122(2):111–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Providence Medical Building, Michigan Ear Institute, 30055 Northwestern Highway, Suite 101, Farmington Hills, MI, 48334, USA

    David D. Walker & Seilesh C. Babu

Authors
  1. David D. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seilesh C. Babu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seilesh C. Babu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

David D. Walker declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Seilesh C. Babu reports personal fees from Acclarent, grants from Oticon Medical, and grants from Cochlear Corporation.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Ossicular Chain Reconstruction

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Walker, D.D., Babu, S.C. History of Ossicular Chain Reconstruction. Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep 8, 61–64 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40136-020-00259-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40136-020-00259-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation