Endoscopic Double Flap Tympanoplasty

Overview

Journal Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

Publisher Springer

Date 2024 Oct 8

PMID 39376288

Authors

Shafaat Ahmad

Ravi Meher

Praveen Kumar Rathore

Ishwar Singh

Vikram Wadhwa

Prakhar Goel

Swezal Lohia

Ananthula Sahaja

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Aim: This study is aimed to compare the outcomes of the two techniques (endoscopic single flap tympanoplasty- ESFT versus endoscopic double flap tympanoplasty - EDFT) of endoscopic tympanoplasty for repairing large tympanic membrane (TM)perforations with limited anterior remnant.

Methodology: In this randomised controlled trial, forty patients with large sized TM perforations were included and randomised in the ESFT and EDFT arms with twenty patients in each group. Both the groups underwent endoscopic tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia graft. The graft uptake rates and hearing results were compared.

Results: Graft success rate was 85% (17/20 cases) in the ESFT group and 90%(18/20 cases) in the EDFT group. The ABG (air-bone gap) improvement median with interquartile range(IQR) was 5 dB (3.12 dB-10 dB) in the ESFT group and 8.75 dB (5dB-11.87 dB) in the EDFT group. The difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: In our study, there was no statistically significant difference in the graft success rate or hearing gain in ESFT or EDFT group. Moreover, there was longer operative time and need for an extra incision while raising the anterior flap. This lack of statistically significant results in our study may be since the study has a very small sample size. Whether the same conclusion is reproducible needs to be further explored by a larger sized randomised controlled trial.

References

Tseng C, Lai M, Wu C, Yuan S, Ding Y . Comparison of endoscopic transcanal myringoplasty and endoscopic type I tympanoplasty in repairing medium-sized tympanic perforations. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2017; 44(6):672-677. DOI: 10.1016/j.anl.2016.12.007. View

Furukawa T, Watanabe T, Ito T, Kubota T, Kakehata S . Feasibility and advantages of transcanal endoscopic myringoplasty. Otol Neurotol. 2014; 35(4):e140-5. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000298. View

Sharp J, Terzis T, Robinson J . Myringoplasty for the anterior perforation: experience with the Kerr flap. J Laryngol Otol. 1992; 106(1):14-6. DOI: 10.1017/s002221510011847x. View

Saliba I, Abela A, Arcand P . Tympanic membrane perforation: size, site and hearing evaluation. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2011; 75(4):527-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2011.01.012. View

Frampton S, Pringle M . Cutaneous sensory deficit following post-auricular incision. J Laryngol Otol. 2011; 125(10):1014-9. DOI: 10.1017/S002221511100199X. View

Lade H, Choudhary S, Vashishth A . Endoscopic vs microscopic myringoplasty: a different perspective. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013; 271(7):1897-902. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-013-2673-z. View

Kartush J, Michaelides E, Becvarovski Z, LaRouere M . Over-under tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 2002; 112(5):802-7. DOI: 10.1097/00005537-200205000-00007. View

Ayache S . Cartilaginous myringoplasty: the endoscopic transcanal procedure. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012; 270(3):853-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-012-2056-x. View

Ohki M, Kikuchi S, Tanaka S . Endoscopic Type 1 Tympanoplasty in Chronic Otitis Media: Comparative Study with a Postauricular Microscopic Approach. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019; 161(2):315-323. DOI: 10.1177/0194599819838778. View

10.

DEredita R, Lens M . Anterior tab flap versus standard underlay myringoplasty in children. Otol Neurotol. 2009; 30(6):777-81. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3181b285d4. View

11.

Raj A, Meher R . Endoscopic transcanal myringoplasty-A study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012; 53(1):47-9. PMC: 3450869. DOI: 10.1007/BF02910979. View

12.

Wick C, Arnaoutakis D, Kaul V, Isaacson B . Endoscopic Lateral Cartilage Graft Tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017; 157(4):683-689. DOI: 10.1177/0194599817709436. View

13.

Stage J . Underlay tympanoplasty with the graft lateral to the malleus handle. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1992; 17(1):6-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1992.tb00978.x. View

14.

Primrose W, Kerr A . The anterior marginal perforation. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1986; 11(3):175-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1986.tb00125.x. View

15.

Plodpai Y . Endoscopic vs Microscopic Overlay Tympanoplasty for Correcting Large Tympanic Membrane Perforations: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018; 159(5):879-886. DOI: 10.1177/0194599818786948. View

16.

Faramarzi M, Atashi S, Edalatkhah M, Roosta S . The effect of anterior tab flap technique on graft success rate in large tympanic membrane perforation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020; 278(6):1765-1772. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-06222-1. View

17.

Bennett M, Zhang D, Labadie R, Noble J . Comparison of Middle Ear Visualization With Endoscopy and Microscopy. Otol Neurotol. 2016; 37(4):362-6. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000988. View

18.

Hosamani P, Ananth L, Medikeri S . Comparative study of efficacy of graft placement with and without anterior tagging in type one tympanoplasty for mucosal-type chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol. 2011; 126(2):125-30. DOI: 10.1017/S0022215111002659. View

19.

Alzoubi F, Tarifi A, Khader Y, de Carpentier J . Comparison between transtympanic and elevation of tympanomeatal flap approaches in tympanoplasty. Otol Neurotol. 2010; 31(5):773-5. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3181e40a41. View

20.

El-Kholy N, Salem M, Rakha A . Endoscopic single versus double flap tympanoplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020; 278(5):1395-1401. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-06212-3. View