Ludovica Pacelli
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Ludovica Pacelli has a total of 10 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alberto Giulio Dragonetti
Unit of Otorhinolaryngology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Andrea Achena
Unit of Otorhinolaryngology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Angelo Placentino
Division of Otorhinolaryngology, Garbagnate Milanese Hospital, Garbagnate Milanese, 20024 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Carmine Prizio
Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Francesco Pilolli
Unit of Otorhinolaryngology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication - Gabriella Mantini
Unit of Otorhinolaryngology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milan, Italy
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 7 February 2025
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Vol. 14 (4) , 1069
Nitinol Prosthesis in Stapes Surgery: Evolution from Heat-Activated to Superelastic Nitinol: A Systematic Review
Background/Objectives: Stapes surgery is a well-established treatment for conductive hearing loss caused by otosclerosis, with the choice of prosthesis playing a pivotal role in audiological outcomes and safety. Heat-activated and superelastic nitinol prostheses are widely used, but their comparative effectiveness and complication profiles remain debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the audiological outcomes, complication rates, and overall performance of these two prosthesis types. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Seven studies involving 273 patients were included. Data on mean air–bone gap (ABG) reduction, complication rates, and follow-up outcomes were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model, and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for comparative analysis. Results: The pooled mean ABG reduction was 20.2 dB (95% CI: 19.47–20.95), indicating substantial and comparable improvements in hearing for both prosthesis types. Heat-activated prostheses achieved slightly higher ABG reduction in individual studies, while superelastic prostheses offered advantages in procedural simplicity. Complication rates were 6.0% for heat-activated and 5.6% for superelastic prostheses. The most common complications included sensorineural hearing loss (2.0–2.4%) and incus-related issues such as necrosis and lateralization. Conclusions: Both prosthesis types provide comparable audiological outcomes and surgical success rates. However, the slightly lower complication rate observed with superelastic prostheses emphasizes their safety and predictability. The choice of prosthesis should be guided by patient anatomy, surgeon expertise, and procedural considerations. Future studies should prioritize long-term outcomes and standardized reporting to further refine prosthesis selection.
- 7 February 2025
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Vol. 14 (4) , 1069
Open AccessNitinol Prosthesis in Stapes Surgery: Evolution from Heat-Activated to Superelastic Nitinol: A Systematic Review
Background/Objectives: Stapes surgery is a well-established treatment for conductive hearing loss caused by otosclerosis, with the choice of prosthesis playing a pivotal role in audiological outcomes and safety. Heat-activated and superelastic nitinol prostheses are widely used, but their comparative effectiveness and complication profiles remain debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the audiological outcomes, complication rates, and overall performance of these two prosthesis types. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Seven studies involving 273 patients were included. Data on mean air–bone gap (ABG) reduction, complication rates, and follow-up outcomes were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model, and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for comparative analysis. Results: The pooled mean ABG reduction was 20.2 dB (95% CI: 19.47–20.95), indicating substantial and comparable improvements in hearing for both prosthesis types. Heat-activated prostheses achieved slightly higher ABG reduction in individual studies, while superelastic prostheses offered advantages in procedural simplicity. Complication rates were 6.0% for heat-activated and 5.6% for superelastic prostheses. The most common complications included sensorineural hearing loss (2.0–2.4%) and incus-related issues such as necrosis and lateralization. Conclusions: Both prosthesis types provide comparable audiological outcomes and surgical success rates. However, the slightly lower complication rate observed with superelastic prostheses emphasizes their safety and predictability. The choice of prosthesis should be guided by patient anatomy, surgeon expertise, and procedural considerations. Future studies should prioritize long-term outcomes and standardized reporting to further refine prosthesis selection.