Comparative Study of Clinical Outcome between Microscopic and Endoscopic Type I Tympanoplasty
Tympanoplasty is one of the most common surgical procedure in ENT, it can be performed with the help of microscope or endoscope. We carried out a prospective randomized comparative study in our tertiary care center to evaluate and compare the results of endoscopic and conventional microscopic tympanoplasty in terms of hearing outcome, surgical time and graft success rate.
Materials and Methods
This prospective randomized comparative study was conducted in Department of Otorhinolaryngology, SHKM Hospital, an associated hospital of GMC Nuh, Haryana India for a period of 12 months from October 2019 to September 2020. A total of 80 patients with central perforation were randomly divided into two equal groups of 40 patients each. In the first group, endoscope was used and in the second group microscope was used to do type 1 tympanoplasty. The patients were kept on follow-up for 6 months. The graft success rates, hearing outcomes and duration of surgery in patients were compared in both groups.
Graft success rates were 90% and 92.5% for the endoscopic and microscopic group, respectively (p > 0.05). Postoperative air-bone gap values were improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.05). The average duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the endoscopic group (mean 42.9 min) relative to the microscopic group (mean 57.2 min) (p < 0.05).
In the management of chronic otitis media, endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty can be a viable alternative to conventional microscopic tympanoplasty, with comparable graft success rates and hearing outcomes.
2. Morris PS, Leach AJ. Acute and chronic otitis media. Pediatr Clin North Am 2009; 56: 1383-99.
3. Rizer FM. Overlay versus underlay tympanoplasty. Part II: the study. Laryngoscope. 1997;107(12 Pt 2):26–36.
4. Tarabichi M. Endoscopic middle ear surgery. Ann Otol RhinolLaryngol. 1999; 108:39-46.
5. Panetti G, Cavaliere M, Panetti M, Marino A, Iemma M. Endo-scopic tympanoplasty in the treatment of chronic otitis media:our experience. Acta Otolaryngol. 2017; 137:225-8.
6. Yiannakis CP, Sproat R, Iyer A. Preliminary outcomes of endo-scopic middle-ear surgery in 103 cases: a UK experience. JLaryngol Otol. 2018; 132:493-6.
7. Güneri EA, Olgun Y. Endoscope-Assisted cochlear implantation.Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2018; 11:89-95.
8. Yadav SP, Aggarwal N, Julaha M, Goel A. Endoscope-assisted myringoplasty. Singapore Med J 2009; 50: 510-2.
9. Mohindra S, Panda NK. Ear surgery without microscope; is it possible. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2010. 62: 138-41.
10. Harugop AS, Mudhol RS, Godhi RA. A comparative study of endoscope assisted myringoplasty and microscope assisted myringoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;60(4):298–302. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-008-0099-5.
11. House WF, Sheehy JL. Myringoplasty: use of ear canalskin compared with other techniques. Arch Otolaryngol.1961;73:407-15.
12. Kartush JM, Michaelides EM, Becvarovski Z, LaRouere MJ. Over-under tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 2002; 112:802-7.
13. El-Guindy A. Endoscopic transcanal myringoplasty. J Laryngol Otol 1992;106(6):493–495. DOI: 10.1017/s0022215100119966.
14. Thomassin JM, Korchia D, Doris JM. Endoscopic-guided otosurgery in the prevention of residual cholesteatomas. Laryngoscope 1993;103(8):939–943. DOI: 10.1288/00005537-199308000-00021.
15. Aoki K. Advantages of endoscopically assisted surgery for attic cholesteatoma. Diagn Ther Endosc 2001; 7: 99-107. [CrossRef]
16. Furukawa T, Watanabe T, Ito T, Kubota T, Kakehata S. Feasibility and advantages of transcanal endoscopic myringoplasty. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35: e140-5.
17. Jyothi AC, Shrikrishna BH, Kulkarni NH, et al. Endoscopic myringoplasty versus microscopic myringoplasty in tubotympanic CSOM: a comparative study of 120 cases. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017;69(3):357–362. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-017-1147-9.
18. Maran RK, Jain AK, Karipriya GR, et al. Microscopic versus endoscopic myringoplasty: a comparative study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019;71(Suppl. 2):1287–1291. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-018-1341-4.
19. Dundar R, Kulduk E, Soy FK, et al. Endoscopic versus microscopic approach to type I tympanoplasty in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014;78(7):1084–1089. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl. 2014.04.013.
20. Plodpai, Y, Paje, N. The outcomes of overlay myringoplasty: endoscopic versus microscopic approach. Am J Otolaryngol 2017;38(5):542–546. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2017.05.007.
21. 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.
22. Pap I, Tóth I, Gede N, et al. Endoscopic type I tympanoplasty is as effective as microscopic type I tympanoplasty but less invasive: a meta-analysis. Clin Otolaryngol 2019;44(6):942–953. DOI: 10.1111/coa.13407.
23. Tseng CC, Lai MT, Wu CC, Yuan SP, Ding YF. Comparison ofthe efficacy of endoscopic tympanoplasty and microscopictympanoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Laryn-goscope. 2017; 127:1890-6.
24. Kuo Che-hung, Hsing-mei Wu. Comparison of endoscopicand microscopic tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol.2017;274:2727-32.
25. Lade H, Choudhary SR, Vashishth A. Endoscopic vs microscopicmyringoplasty: a different perspective. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryn-gol. 2014; 271:1897-902.
26. Kaya I, Sezgin B, Sergin D, Ozturk A, Eraslan S, Gode S, et al.Endoscopic versus microscopic type 1 tympanoplasty in thesame patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial. EurArch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017; 274:3343-9.
27. El-Hennawi DEM, Ahmed MR, Abou-Halawa AS, Al-Hamtary MA.Endoscopic push-through technique compared to microscopicunderlay myringoplasty in anterior tympanic membrane perfo-rations. J Laryngol Otol. 2018; 132:509-13.
28. Sudhir Babu V, Sreenivasulu M. Endoscopic middle ear surgerycase study. Indian J Appl Res. 2015; 5:71-3.
29. 29.Ghaffar S, Ikram M, Zia S, Raza A. Incorporating the endoscope into middle ear surgery. Ear Nose Throat J 2006; 85: 593-6.
Copyright (c) 2022 Author (s). Published by Siddharth Health Research and Social Welfare Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.