Arched Titanium Ossicular Prosthesis Anchoring

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing ossicular replacement prostheses suffer from material deficiencies, such as movement due to lack of anchorage, inadequate mechanical-acoustic design, and neglect of ear physiology, leading to suboptimal hearing recovery and voice discrimination in noisy environments.

Innovation Solution

A total ossicular replacement prosthesis with an elongated, arched body featuring a U-shaped anchoring fork made from biocompatible materials like titanium, anchored underneath the hammer handle, which leverages the hammer muscle and maintains vascularization, preventing movement and enhancing sound discrimination.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If prostheses are manufactured from ceramic materials or bone-similar materials, then biocompatibility is improved, but positional stability deteriorates due to movement and contact with adjacent bone

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovebiocompatibilityVSAvoidpositional stability
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The prosthesis combines titanium (metal) with ceramic or bone-similar materials in a composite structure. The titanium provides structural strength and positional stability, while the ceramic/bone-similar material interfaces with biological tissue for biocompatibility. This composite approach resolves the contradiction by integrating materials with complementary properties.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

Solution Approach 2:

Different regions of the prosthesis use different materials optimized for their specific functions: titanium in regions requiring mechanical strength and stability, ceramic or bone-similar materials in regions requiring biocompatibility and tissue integration. This local differentiation resolves the contradiction between stability and biocompatibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Ease of operation

If prostheses are designed based on surgeon preferences rather than mechanical-acoustic criteria, then ease of operation is improved, but acoustic efficiency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesurgical easeVSAvoidacoustic efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The prosthesis design optimizes specific parameters (length, curvature, cross-sectional area, material properties) based on mechanical-acoustic criteria to maximize sound transmission efficiency. These parameter optimizations are achieved while maintaining features that facilitate surgical implantation, resolving the contradiction between acoustic efficiency and surgical ease.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If prostheses are left loose in the eardrum without fixation, then ease of operation is improved, but positional stability deteriorates due to movement during healing

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveimplantation easeVSAvoidpositional stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The prosthesis incorporates pre-formed anchoring features (such as hooks, loops, or attachment points) that enable secure fixation to the eardrum or ossicles. These preliminary structural preparations allow for stable positioning during the healing process while maintaining ease of surgical implantation through standardized attachment mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Device complexity

If prostheses do not leverage middle-ear muscle functions, then device complexity is reduced, but hearing performance deteriorates in noisy environments

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprosthesis complexityVSAvoidvoice discrimination in noise
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The prosthesis is designed to work in conjunction with the existing middle-ear muscle system, leveraging the muscles' natural acoustic reflex functions. By integrating with rather than replacing muscle functions, the prosthesis maintains simple structure while improving hearing performance in noisy environments through the muscles' protective and discriminatory functions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The prosthesis provides stable anchorage, improves sound intelligibility in noisy environments, and mitigates hearing loss by aligning with ear physiology, ensuring effective sound transmission and preventing vascular disruption.

Implementation Method 1

a superelastic metal alloy engagement structure for providing a compressive force about a portion of an ossicle

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectSuperelasticity: Pseudoelasticity

Implementation Method 2

said engagement structure is deformable to widen the opening to permit the portion of the ossicle to be received therein, and when the engagement structure is deformed to receive the portion of the ossicle the stress in the engagement structure, after a short duration of linear elastic behavior, remains substantially constant

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElastic deformation: Elasticity

Data Source

PatentEP2520248B1Prosthesis for complete ossicular replacement
Publication Date: 2018.09.26 UNIVERSITY OF VALLADOLID
  • EP2520248B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2

AI summary

The invention relates to a prosthesis, preferably made of titanium or an alloy of such material, which includes an arched rod (1), a anchoring fork (2) by simply pressing on the handle of the hammer, and a base (3) at the opposite end with gradually increasing thickness and as an extension of the same arched rod (1), such as to establish a widening of the surface in contact with the perilymph of the vestibule or oval window of the ear, the rod (1) being arched in order to overcome the eccentric position of the handle (8) of the hammer (7) on which the actual prosthesis is anchored via the fork (2).