ArticleTurkish archives of otorhinolaryngology2015
Titanium versus Hydroxyapatite Prostheses: Comparison of Hearing and Anatomical Outcomes after Ossicular Chain Reconstruction.
Article in Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Efficacy of Prostheses in Hearing Restoration: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025Article
- Extrusion and Dislocation in Titanium Middle Ear Prostheses: A Literature Review.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- Feasibility of 3D-printed middle ear prostheses in partial ossicular chain reconstruction.International journal of bioprinting · 2023Article
- Biocompatible Materials in Otorhinolaryngology and Their Antibacterial Properties.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Biocompatible Nanocomposite Implant with Silver Nanoparticles for Otology-In Vivo Evaluation.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare hearing and anatomical outcomes after ossicular chain reconstruction with titanium or hydroxyapatite prostheses.
methodsIn this study, patients who underwent tympanoplasty and ossicular chain reconstruction with titanium or hydroxyapatite prostheses at a university hospital from January 2007 to February 2013 were retrospectively reviewed; they had a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to the type of prostheses. The surgical procedure, follow-up examinations, preoperative, and postoperative audiometry results were noted and evaluated for partial and total prostheses. The results were compared both for titanium and hydroxyapatite prostheses.
resultsThe study subjects included 51 patients. Titanium had better hearing results in partial prostheses (p<0.05), while the anatomical outcomes were similar. Nevertheless, both types had similar results in total prostheses (p>0.05). The extrusion rate was 5.8% for all patients.
conclusionBoth types of prostheses had satisfactory functional and anatomical results and no preponderance could be stated, except for the hearing results of partial titanium prostheses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.