European Radiology

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 587–594 | Cite as

Clinical investigation of flat panel CT following middle ear reconstruction: a study of 107 patients

  • K. ZaouiEmail author
  • J. Kromeier
  • M. Neudert
  • T. Beleites
  • T. Zahnert
  • R. Laszig
  • C. Offergeld
Head and Neck



After middle ear reconstruction using partial or total ossicular replacement prostheses (PORP/TORP), an air–bone gap (ABG) may persist because of prosthesis displacement or malposition. So far, CT of the temporal bone has played the main role in the diagnosis of reasons for postoperative insufficient ABG improvement. Recent experimental and clinical studies have evaluated flat panel CT (fpCT) as an alternative imaging technique that provides images with high isovolumetric resolution, fewer metal-induced artefacts and lower irradiation doses.


One hundred and seven consecutive patients with chronic otitis media with or without cholesteatoma underwent reconstruction by PORP (n = 52) or TORP (n = 55). All subjects underwent preoperative and postoperative audiometric testing and postoperative fpCT.


Statistical evaluation of all 107 patients as well as the sole sub-assembly groups (PORP or TORP) showed a highly significant correlation between hearing improvement and fpCT-determined prosthesis position. FpCT enables detailed postoperative information on patients with middle ear reconstruction.


FpCT is a new imaging technique that provides immediate feedback on surgical results after reconstructive middle ear surgery. Specific parameters evaluated by fpCT may serve as a predictive tool for estimated postoperative hearing improvement. Therefore this imaging technique is suitable for postoperative quality control in reconstructive middle ear surgery.

Key Points

Flat panel CT offers advantages with regard to artefacts and radiation dose.

FpCT provides higher isovolumetric resolution of temporal bone and middle ear implants.

FpCT allows prediction of the postoperative hearing outcome in patients.

FpCT is an important tool for immediate postoperative quality control.

FpCT improves postoperative management of patients with complications following ossicular replacement


Ossicular replacement prostheses PORP TORP Flat panel CT Imaging Middle ear Quality control 


  1. 1.
    Begall K, Zimmermann H (2000) Reconstruction of the ossicular chain with titanium implants. Results of a multicenter study. Laryngorhinootologie 79:139–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bernal-Sprekelsen M, Romaguera Lliso MD, Sanz Gonzalo JJ (2003) Cartilage palisades in type III tympanoplasty: anatomic and functional long-term results. Otol Neurotol 24:38–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dost P, Wiemann M, ten Cate WJ (2005) Biomaterial studies in cultures of human stapedial bone-like cells. HNO 53:545–547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sudhoff H, Lindner N, Gronemeyer J, Dazert S, Hildmann H (2005) Study of osteointegration of a titanium prosthesis to the stapes: observations on an accidentally extracted stapes. Otol Neurotol 26:583–586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Asai M, Huber AM, Goode RL (1999) Analysis of the best site on the stapes footplate for ossicular chain reconstruction. Acta Otolaryngol 119:356–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fisch U, May J, Linder T, Naumann IC (2004) A new L-shaped titanium prosthesis for total reconstruction of the ossicular chain. Otol Neurotol 25:891–902PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huttenbrink KB, Zahnert T, Wustenberg EG, Hofmann G (2004) Titanium clip prosthesis. Otol Neurotol 25:436–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rosowski JJ, Merchant SN (1995) Mechanical and acoustic analysis of middle ear reconstruction. Am J Otol 16:486–497PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwager K (2002) Titanium as a material for ossicular replacement—basic aspects and clinical application. Laryngorhinootologie 81:178–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zahnert T, Huttenbrink KB (2005) Pitfalls in ossicular chain reconstruction. HNO 53:89–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Offergeld C, Kromeier J, Aschendorff A et al (2007) Rotational tomography of the normal and reconstructed middle ear in temporal bones: an experimental study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264:345–351PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bozzato A, Struffert T, Hertel V, Iro H, Hornung J (2010) Analysis of the accuracy of high-resolution computed tomography techniques for the measurement of stapes prostheses. Eur Radiol 20:566–571PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Naumann IC, Porcellini B, Fisch U (2005) Otosclerosis: incidence of positive findings on high-resolution computed tomography and their correlation to audiological test data. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 114:709–716PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aschendorff A, Kubalek R, Hochmuth A et al (2004) Imaging procedures in cochlear implant patients—evaluation of different radiological techniques. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 552:46–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zaoui K, Kromeier J, Neudert M et al (2012) Flat panel CT following stapes prosthesis insertion: an experimental and clinical study. Eur Radiol 22:837–844PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Offergeld C, Kromeier J, Merchant SN et al (2010) Experimental investigation of rotational tomography in reconstructed middle ears with clinical implications. Hear Res 263:191–197PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Offergeld C (2013) Quality control following reconstructive middle ear surgery: From bench to bedside. HNOGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Vos C, Gersdorff M, Gerard JM (2007) Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty. Otol Neurotol 28:61–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morris DP, Bance M, van Wijhe RG, Kiefte M, Smith R (2004) Optimum tension for partial ossicular replacement prosthesis reconstruction in the human middle ear. Laryngoscope 114:305–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yung M (2006) Long-term results of ossiculoplasty: reasons for surgical failure. Otol Neurotol 27:20–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yung M, Vowler SL (2006) Long-term results in ossiculoplasty: an analysis of prognostic factors. Otol Neurotol 27:874–881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rodt T, Bartling S, Schmidt AM, Weber BP, Lenarz T, Becker H (2002) Virtual endoscopy of the middle ear: experimental and clinical results of a standardised approach using multi-slice helical computed tomography. Eur Radiol 12:1684–1692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ayache D, Williams MT (2003) Malleus handle fracture. Otol Neurotol 24:519–520PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chuang MT, Chiang IC, Liu GC, Lin WC (2006) Multidetector row CT demonstration of inner and middle ear structures. Clin Anat 19:337–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roosli C, Hoffmann A, Treumann T, Linder TE (2008) Significance of computed tomography evaluation before revision stapes surgery. HNO 56:895–900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hahn Y, Diaz R, Hartman J, Bobinski M, Brodie H (2009) Assessing stapes piston position using computed tomography: a cadaveric study. Otol Neurotol 30:223–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bartling SH, Majdani O, Gupta R et al (2007) Large scan field, high spatial resolution flat-panel detector based volumetric CT of the whole human skull base and for maxillofacial imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 36:317–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Trieger A, Schulze A, Schneider M, Zahnert T, Murbe D (2011) In vivo measurements of the insertion depth of cochlear implant arrays using flat-panel volume computed tomography. Otol Neurotol 32:152–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zeitler DM, Wang KH, Prasad RS, Wang EY, Roland JT (2011) Flat-panel computed tomography versus multislice computed tomography to evaluate cochlear implant positioning. Cochlear Implants Int 12:216–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Offergeld C, Pilling E, Lazurashvili N et al (2007) Conventional tomographic investigations of the reconstructed middle ear in temporal bone specimen. Laryngorhinootologie 86:501–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Choi HG, Lee DH, Chang KH, Yeo SW, Yoon SH, Jun BC (2011) Frequency-specific hearing results after surgery for chronic ear diseases. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 4:126–130PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Zaoui
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Kromeier
    • 3
  • M. Neudert
    • 4
  • T. Beleites
    • 4
  • T. Zahnert
    • 4
  • R. Laszig
    • 2
  • C. Offergeld
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck SurgeryUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Ruprecht Karls UniversityHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck SurgeryUniversity Hospital Freiburg, Albert Ludwigs UniversityFreiburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of RadiologySt. Josefs Hospital, RkKFreiburgGermany
  4. 4.Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck SurgeryUniversity Hospital Dresden, Technical UniversityDresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations