» Articles » PMID: 30194495

Anatomical and Functional Long-term Results of Endoscopic Butterfly Inlay Myringoplasty

Overview
Date 2018 Sep 9
PMID 30194495
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term anatomical (graft success) and functional (audiological) results of endoscopic butterfly inlay myringoplasty.

Methods: The files of 56 patients (29 female, 27 male) who were diagnosed with noncomplicated chronic otitis media and underwent endoscopic butterfly inlay myringoplasty in 2014-2016 at a tertiary referral center were reviewed. Age, gender, follow-up time, perforation location (anterior, posterior and central), perforation size (small, medium), pre- and postoperative pure tone audiometry (PTA) thresholds, pre- and postoperative air-bone gaps (ABG) and complications were noted.

Results: Graft success rate was 98.2% in postoperative 12th month and 94.6% in postoperative 24th month. In all patients, mean PTA for air conduction was 35.2 ± 3.9 dB preoperatively and 27.5 ± 4.3 dB in postoperative 6th month, 25.1 ± 3.5 dB in postoperative 12th month and 20.4 ± 3.2 in postoperative 24th month. Preoperative mean ABG was 24.2 ± 3.8 dB, whereas 19.5 ± 4.3 dB 6 months after surgery, 17.1 ± 3.5 dB 12 months after surgery and 12.4 ± 3.1 dB 24 months after surgery. There was significant difference between pre- and postoperative PTA and ABG in all 6th, 12th, 24th month follow-up (p = 0.001 for all measurements). Three patients (5%) had myringitis after surgery. Two patients (3%) had total graft resorption.

Conclusion: We suggested that endoscopic butterfly inlay myringoplasty is a safe surgical method with high graft success and effective hearing reconstruction. Follow-up is necessary for at least 2 years for precise anatomical and functional evaluation of the surgery.

Citing Articles

Underlay Myringoplasty Versus Overlay Myringoplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Albazee E, Salamah M, Althaidy M, Hagr A Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024; 76(2):1848-1856.

PMID: 38566745 PMC: 10982238. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-023-04425-6.


Cartilaginous Myringoplasty: Anatomical and Functional Results.

Taleuan A, Ridal M, Elatiq H, Benmansour N, Oudidi A, Elalami M Cureus. 2023; 15(4):e37059.

PMID: 37153294 PMC: 10155593. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.37059.


Long Term Versus Short Term Hearing Results in Endoscopic Sandwich Myringoplasty.

Shrestha B, Dhakal A, Pradhan A, Pokharel M, Rajbhandari P, Kc A Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2021; 33(118):291-299.

PMID: 34692576 PMC: 8507947. DOI: 10.22038/ijorl.2021.54372.2857.


Endoscopic butterfly inlay myringoplasty for large perforations.

Demir E, Coskun Z, Celiker M, Terzi S, Erdivanli O, Balaban G Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019; 276(10):2791-2795.

PMID: 31346722 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-019-05579-2.

References
1.
Kim H, Kim M, Jeon J, Kim J, Moon I, Lee W . Functional and practical outcomes of inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty. Otol Neurotol. 2014; 35(8):1458-62. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000419. View

2.
Akyigit A, Karlidag T, Keles E, Kaygusuz I, Yalcin S, Polat C . Endoscopic cartilage butterfly myringoplasty in children. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2016; 44(2):152-155. DOI: 10.1016/j.anl.2016.05.005. View

3.
Ghanem M, Monroy A, Alizade F, Nicolau Y, Eavey R . Butterfly cartilage graft inlay tympanoplasty for large perforations. Laryngoscope. 2006; 116(10):1813-6. DOI: 10.1097/01.mlg.0000231742.11048.ed. View

4.
Eavey R . Inlay tympanoplasty: cartilage butterfly technique. Laryngoscope. 1998; 108(5):657-61. DOI: 10.1097/00005537-199805000-00006. View

5.
Mehta R, Rosowski J, Voss S, ONeil E, Merchant S . Determinants of hearing loss in perforations of the tympanic membrane. Otol Neurotol. 2006; 27(2):136-43. PMC: 2918411. DOI: 10.1097/01.mao.0000176177.17636.53. View