Comparative study of hearing level pre and post ossiculoplasty in Aseer Central Hospital, Saudi Arabia


  • Abdullah Assiri Department of Otolaryngology, College of Medicine, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia
  • Ali M. Al-Qannass Department of Otolaryngology, Armed Forces hospital, Southern Region, Saudi Arabia
  • Tawfiq A. Khurayzi Department of Otolaryngology, King Fahad Central hospital, Jizan, Saudi Arabia
  • Talat E. Alardi Department of Otolaryngology, Aseer Ceneral hospital, Abha, Saudi Arabia



Ossiculoplasty, Successful rate, Hearing outcomes, Follow-up, Retrospective


Background: Achieving successful hearing outcomes following ossiculoplasty in patients with middle ear diseases depend on several factors. Unfortunately, the literature is confusing concerning the middle ear factors and types of pathologic process that are most important in predicting hearing outcome. The objective of the study was to investigate the improvement or deterioration of hearing after ossiculoplasty and identify the possible prognostic factors.

Methods: Between January, 2012 and December, 2014, 30 ossiculoplasties were performed and followed up by the first author with the help of other authors in Otolaryngology department, Aseer Ceneral hospital, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The patients were followed up at 6 months, 9 months after the operation and then on a yearly basis. Postoperative hearing outcomes were considered successful if the postoperative air-bone gap was within 20 dB while it was considered not successful if it exceeds 20 dB.  

Results: The study included 30patients. Their age ranged between 18 and 61 years with a mean of 37.4±10.7 years. Sixty percent of them (n=18) were females and forty percent (n=12) were males. Pre-operative PTA was 37.83±8.97 dB and it decreased to 23.0±12.57 dB postoperatively. This difference was statistically significant (p<0.001) with an average change in ABG of 150 dB across the 30 patients. The successful rate was 50%. the only factor proved to be significantly associated with successful ossiculoplasty was the male gender as 75% of makes compared to 33.3% of females patients reported postoperative air-bone gap within 20 dB, p=0.030.

Conclusions: Successful rate of ossiculoplasty in Asser central hospital is within the globally reported rates. However, further larger prospective study is recommended for better understanding of predictive factors for hearing improvement after ossiculoplasty that may contribute to the surgeon’s judgment and the information given to patients.


Goebel JA, Jacob A. Use of Mimix hydroxyapatite bone cement for difficult ossicular reconstruction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;132:727-34.

Yung M. Long-term results of ossiculoplasty: reasons for surgical failure. Otol Neurotol. 2006;27:20–6.

Dornhoffer JL, Gardner E. Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty: a statistical staging system. Otol Neurotol. 2001;22:299–304.

Whittemore KR Jr, Merchant SN, Rosowski JJ. Acoustic mechanisms: canal wall-up versus canal wall down mastoidectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998; 118:751-61.

Ikeda M, Yoshida S, Ikui A, Shigihara S. Canal wall down tympanoplasty with canal reconstruction for middle-ear cholesteatoma: post-operative hearing, cholesteatoma recurrence, and status of re-aeration of reconstructed middle-ear cavity. J Laryngol Otol. 2003;117:249-55.

Hughes GM. Ossicular chain reconstruction: a comparison of reported results. Am J Otol. 1987;8:371-4.

Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium. Guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;113:186-7.

Chavan SS, Jain PV, Vedi JN, Rai DK, Kadri H. Ossiculoplasty: A Prospective Study of 80 Cases. Iranian J Otorhinolaryngol. 2014;26(3):76.

Uyar M, Acar A, Kılınç SB, Boynueğr S, Kaya A, Çavuşoğlu F, et al. Hearing outcomes after suppurative chronic otitis media surgery. Kulak Burun BogazIhtis Derg. 2015;25(3):131-6.

Mishiro Y, Sakagami M, Kitahara T, Kondoh K, Kubo T. Long-term hearing outcomes after Ossiculoplasty in comparison to short-term outcomes. Otol Neurotol. 2008;29:326-9.

Yung M, Vowler SL. Long-term results in Ossiculoplasty: An analysis of prognostic factors. Otology & Neurotology 2006; 27:874-81.

Mishiro Y, Sakagami M, Adachi O, Kakutani C. Prognostic factors for short-term outcomes after Ossiculoplasty using multivariate analysis with logistic regression. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;135(8):738-41.

Vrabec JT, Stierman K, Grady J. Hydroxyapatite prosthesis extrusion. Otol Neurotol. 2002;23:653-6.

Mills RP. The influence of pathological and technical variables on hearing results in ossiculoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol. 1993;18:202-5.

Dornhoffer JL, Gardner E. Prognostic factors in ossiculoplasty: a statistical staging system. Otol Neurotol. 2001;22:299–304.

Brackmann DE, Sheehy JL, Luxford WM. TORPs and PORPs in tympanoplasty: a review of 1042 operations. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1984;92:32–7.

Goldenberg RA. Hydroxylapatite ossicular replacement prostheses: preliminary results. Laryngoscope 1990;100(7):693–700.

Gary Jackson C, Glasscock ME, Schwaber MK, Nissen AJ, Christiansen SG, Smith PG. Ossicular chain reconstruction: the TORP and PORP in chronic ear disease. Laryngoscope. 1983;93(8):981-8.






Original Research Articles