AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Powered by AMiner. Clicking this button will take you away from SciOpen.
Home Journal of Otology Article
PDF (432.4 KB)
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research paper | Open Access

Comparison between MatriX and mAXIS titanium prosthesis in stapedotomy: prospective study and review of the literature

Angelo Immordino1( ), Pollarolo Marco2, Francesco Lorusso3, Federico Sireci4, Palmira Immordino5, Salvatore Gallina6, Francesco Dispenza7
Otorhinolaringology Section, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, AOUP Paolo Giaccone, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: angelo.immordino182@gmail.com Twitter: @immordinORL; ORCID: 0000-0002-3414-6492
Otorhinolaringology Section, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, AOUP Paolo Giaccone, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: Pollarolomarco@gmail.com Twitter: NA; ORCID: 0000-0003-4673-9903
Otorhinolaringology Section, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, AOUP Paolo Giaccone, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: dott.francescolorusso@gmail.com Twitter: @Frances62477010; ORCID: 0000-0002-2120-5852
Otorhinolaringology Section, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, AOUP Paolo Giaccone, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: federicosireci@hotmail.it Twitter: @federicosireci; ORCID: 0000-0002-9264-1184
Hygiene and Preventive Medicine Section, Department of Health Promotion, Maternal and Infant Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Palermo. AOUP Paolo Giaccone, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: palmira.immordino@unipa.it Twitter: NA; ORCID: 0000-0002-1051-6874
Otorhinolaringology Section, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Policlinico ‘‘Paolo Giaccone’’, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: salvatore.gallina@unipa.it Twitter: NA; ORCID: 0000-0003-1137-7260
Otorhinolaringology Section, Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics, AOUP Paolo Giaccone, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 133, 90127 Palermo, Italy. E-Mail addres: francesco.dispenza@gmail.com Twitter: @franzotorino; ORCID: 0000-0002-5844-9762
Show Author Information

Abstract

Background

Stapes prostheses play a crucial role in improving auditory performance and facilitating the patient's reintegration into social life. However, determining the ideal characteristics of a prosthesis and identifying the best commercially available option remain challenging. This study aims to compare the outcomes of two different types of prostheses: the MatriX Stapes Prosthesis and the new mAXIS Stapes Prosthesis.

Methods

A prospective study was conducted on patients diagnosed with suspected otosclerosis who underwent stapedotomy, receiving either the MatriX or mAXIS prosthesis randomly during surgery. Postoperative follow-ups were conducted for at least one year. Audiometric evaluations were analyzed using statistical tests. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement.

Results

The prospective study included 84 patients, divided into two groups (G1: MatriX, G2: mAXIS). The auditory results were satisfactory for both prostheses, demonstrating their effectiveness in improving hearing thresholds. We observed a gain for air conduction threshold of 26.2 dB vs 21.2 dB with an ABG closure of 20.7 dB vs and 21.2 dB in G1 and G2 respectively. The literature review encompassed 15 studies, revealing overall positive outcomes with different prosthetic materials.

Conclusions

The study revealed effective auditory improvement with both prostheses, yet no statistically significant differences in air-bone gap closure or average hearing gain. Titanium emerged as the preferred material due to its biocompatibility, lightweight nature, and stability under magnetic resonance imaging. The mAXIS prosthesis is introduced as a cost-effective alternative with favorable intraoperative features.

Keywords

stapedotomystapes surgerystapes prosthesessystematic review

References

[1]
Bernardeschi, D., De Seta, D., Canu, G., et al. (2018) Does the diameter of the stapes prosthesis really matter? A prospective clinical study. Laryngoscope.128(8):1922-1926.
Crossref
[2]
Canu, G., Lauretani, F., Russo, F.Y., et al. (2017) Early functional results using the nitibond prosthesis in stapes surgery. Acta Otolaryngol. 137(3):259-264.
Crossref
[3]
Declau, F., Van Spaendonck, M., Timmermans, J.P., et al. (2001) Prevalence of otosclerosis in an unselected series of temporal bones. Otology and Neurotology. 22(5):596-602.
Crossref
[4]
Dispenza, F., Cappello, F., Kulamarva, G., et al. (2013) The discovery of stapes. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 33(5):357-9.
[5]
Ealy M., Smith R.J.H. Otosclerosis. (2011) Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 70:122-129.
Crossref
[6]
Faramarzi, M., Gilanifar, N., Roosta, S. (2017) Comparison of Fluoroplastic Causse Loop Piston and Titanium Soft-Clip in Stapedotomy. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 29(90):23-28.
[7]
Faramarzi, M., Roosta, S., Daneshian, N. (2020) Comparison between Fluoroplastic and Platinum/Titanium Piston in Stapedotomy: A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Study. J Int Adv Otol.16(2):234-240.
Crossref
[8]
Faramarzi, M., Pedramfard, P., Roosta, S. et al. (2021) Evaluating hearing results in stapedotomy: Comparison of fluoroplastic Causse loop piston and Matrix prosthesis. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 4;6(6):1289-1295.
Crossref
[9]
Fisch, U. Tympanoplasty, Mastoidectomy, and Stapes Surgery. Stuttgart (DE): Thieme Publishing Group, 1994.
[10]
Fritsch, M.H., Naumann, I.C. (2008) Phylogeny of the stapes prosthesis. Otol Neurotol. 29(3):407-15.
Crossref
[11]
Fritsch, M.H. (2007) MRI Scanners and the Stapes Prosthesis. Otol Neurotol. 28(6):733-738.
Crossref
[12]
Gjuric, M., Rukavina, L. (2007) Evolution of stapedectomy prostheses over time. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 65:174-178.
Crossref
[13]
Hall, J.G. Otosclerosis in Norway, a geographical and genetical study. (1974) Acta Otolaryngol. 324:1-20.
[14]
Harris, J.P., Gong, S. (2007) Comparison of hearing results of nitinol SMART stapes piston prosthesis with conventional piston prostheses: postoperative results of nitinol stapes prosthesis. Otol Neurotol. 28(5):692-5.
Crossref
[15]
Hornung, J.A., Brase, C., Bozzato, A. et al. (2009) First experience with a new titanium clip stapes prosthesis and a comparison with the earlier model used in stapes surgery. Laryngoscope.119(12):2421-7.
Crossref
[16]
House, H.P. (1962) The Prefabricated Wire Loop-Gelfoam: Stapedectomy. Archives of Otolaryngolog. 76(4):298-302.
Crossref
[17]
Huber, A.M., Hornung, J., Plontke, S., et al. (2014) NiTiBOND, eine optimierte Steigbügelprothese zur chirurgischen Behandlung der Otosklerose. Laryngorhinootologie. 93(3):178-85.
Crossref
[18]
Immordino, A., Lorusso, F., Sireci, F., et al. (2023) Acute pneumolabyrinth: a rare complication after cochlear implantation in a patient with obstructive sleep apnoea on CPAP therapy. BMJ Case Rep. 30;16(6):e254069.
Crossref
[19]
Immordino, A., Salvago, P., Sireci, F., et al. (2023) Mastoidectomy in surgical procedures to treat retraction pockets: a single-center experience and review of the literature. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 280(3):1081-1087.
Crossref
[20]
Immordino, A., Sireci, F., Lorusso, F., et al. (2022) The Role of Cartilage-perichondrium Tympanoplasty in the Treatment of Tympanic Membrane Retractions: Systematic Review of the Literature. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 28;26(3):e499-e504.
Crossref
[21]
Knox, G.W., Reitan, H. (2005) Shape-memory stapes prosthesis for otosclerosis surgery. Laryngoscope.115(8):1340-1346.
Crossref
[22]
Laske, R.D., Roosli, C., Chatzimichalis, M.V. et al. (2011) The influence of prosthesis diameter in stapes surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature. Otology and Neurotology. 32(4):520-528.
Crossref
[23]
Mangham, C.A., Neel, J., Mangham, H.F. (2008a) Success of five stapes prostheses evaluated by Kaplan-Meier product-survival procedure. Otol Neurotol. 2008 Oct;29(7):900-4.
Crossref
[24]
Mangham, C.A. (2008b) Titanium CliP piston versus platinum-ribbon Teflon piston: piston and fenestra size affect air-bone gap. Otol Neurotol. 29(1):8-12.
Crossref
[25]
Michael, J., Fucci, M.J., Lippy, W.H., et al. (1998) Prosthesis size in stapedectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 118:1-5.
Crossref
[26]
Odat, H., Kanaan, Y., Alali, M. et al. (2021) Hearing results after stapedotomy for otosclerosis: comparison of prosthesis variables. J Laryngol Otol. 135(1):28-32.
Crossref
[27]
Pearson, R.D., Kurland, L.T., Cody, D.T.R. (1974) Incidence of Diagnosed Clinical Otosclerosis. Arch Otolaryngol. 99(4):288-291.
Crossref
[28]
Pollarolo, M., Immordino, A., Immordino, P. et al. (2022) Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Police Officers: Systematic Review. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 34(124):211-218.
[29]
Potena, M., Portmann, D., Guindi, S. (2015) Audiological comparison between two different clips prostheses in stapes surgery. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord). 136(1):33-6.
[30]
Priola, R., Sireci, F., Lorusso. F., et al. Complex forms of benign paroxysmal vertigo. In: Dizziness: prevalence, risk factors and management. Martines, F., Salvago, P., New York: Nova Publishers Inc. 2021: 117-149.
[31]
Rajan, G.P., Eikelboom, R.H., Anandacoomaraswamy, K.S. et al. (2005). In vivo performance of the Nitinol shape-memory stapes prosthesis during hearing restoration surgery in otosclerosis: a first report. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 15;72(2):305-9.
Crossref
[32]
Rudic, M., Keogh, I., Wagner, R., et al. (2015) The pathophysiology of otosclerosis: Review of current research. Hear Res. 330:51-56.
Crossref
[33]
Schrötzlmair, F., Suchan, F., Kisser, U., et al. (2013) Promising clinical results of an innovative self-crimping stapes prosthesis in otosclerosis surgery. Otol Neurotol. 34(9):1571-5.
Crossref
[34]
Schuknecht, H.F. (1960) Stapedectomy and graft-prosthesis operation. Acta Otolaryngol. 51(3-4):241-243.
Crossref
[35]
Sevy, A., Arriaga, M. (2018) The Stapes Prosthesis: Past, Present, and Future. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 51(2):393-404.
Crossref
[36]
Shea, J.J. (1958) Fenestration of the oval window. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 67(4):932-951.
Crossref
[37]
Tange, R.A., de Bruijn, A.J., Grolman, W. (1998) Experience with a new pure gold piston in stapedotomy for cases of otosclerosis. Auris Nasus Larynx.;25(3):249-53.
Crossref
[38]
Tange, R.A., Grolman, W. (2008) An analysis of the air-bone gap closure obtained by a crimping and a non-crimping titanium stapes prosthesis in otosclerosis. Auris Nasus Larynx. 35(2):181-4.
Crossref
[39]
Thomas, J.P., Minovi, A., Dazert, S. (2011) Current aspects of etiology, diagnosis and therapy of otosclerosis. Otolaryngologia Polska. 65(3):162-170.
Crossref
[40]
Van Rompaey, V., Claes, G., Potvin, J. et al. (2011) Systematic review of the literature on nitinol prostheses in surgery for otosclerosis: Assessment of the adequacy of statistical power. Otology and Neurotology. 32(3):357-366.
Crossref
[41]
Wegner, I., Eldaebes, M.M.A.S., Landry, T.G., et al. (2016) The effect of piston diameter in stapedotomy for otosclerosis: A temporal bone model. Otology and Neurotology. 37(10):1497-1502.
Crossref
[42]
Wegner, I., Kamalski, D.M.A., Tange, R.A., et al. (2014) Laser versus conventional fenestration in stapedotomy for otosclerosis: A systematic review. Laryngoscope. 124(7):1687-1693.
Crossref
[43]
Wengen, DF. (2000) Eine neue selbsthaltende Titan-Gold-Stapesprothese. Schweiz Med Wochenschr Suppl 116:83S-86S
Journal of Otology
Volume 20 Issue 2,
April 2025
Pages 93-102
DOI: 10.26599/JOTO.2025.9540014

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Cite this Report
Close
Close
Cite this article:
Immordino A, Marco P, Lorusso F, et al. Comparison between MatriX and mAXIS titanium prosthesis in stapedotomy: prospective study and review of the literature. Journal of Otology, 2025, 20(2): 93-102. https://doi.org/10.26599/JOTO.2025.9540014

248

Views

40

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Web of Science

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics
Received: 11 March 2024
Revised: 14 January 2025
Accepted: 11 March 2025
Published: 30 April 2025
© 2025 PLA General Hospital Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. Publishing services by Tsinghua University Press.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).