Literature DB >> 19735950

Pediatric myringoplasty: postaural versus transmeatal approach.

Angela Halim1, Johannes Borgstein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Where various surgical options exist for solving the same problem, and the results are similar, Occam's razor may be a suitable way of deciding which technique to use. The postaural [retroauricular] approach in myringoplasty is favoured generally, for its reported better overview of the middle ear. However, due to increasing interests in both patients' comfort and a more efficient use of operating time, transmeatal approach is a good alternative. The aim of this study is to investigate the difference in success rates between these two approaches and the factors that contribute to success.
METHODS: Retrospective case note study. Cases that achieve tympanic membrane (TM) closure, within 1-year post-operative are considered to be successful. PATIENTS: A group of 218 ears in 180 patients (median age 10.0, range from 5 to 18 years) who had undergone either postaural or transmeatal myringoplasty with or without ossicular reconstruction. Age, gender, site and size of the perforation, underlying cause of the perforation and status of contralateral ear were recorded. The patients were followed at 6 days, 7 weeks and then every 6 months to determine the incidence of TM closure. Audiograms were taken preoperatively, at 7 weeks and between 7 and 15 months post-operative.
RESULTS: The overall success rate was 78.9%. The difference in the success rates of the two approaches, 79.8% of postaural myringoplasty against 78.4% of transmeatal myringoplasty, is not significant (p=0.81). Post-operative air bone gap (ABG) is significantly improved when compared to that of preoperative (p<or=0.01). Younger age (5-6 years old) is associated with a lower success rate. Though their hearing is significantly improved, the difference is clinically irrelevant.
CONCLUSION: Postaural and transmeatal approaches in myringoplasty have comparable closure rate. Occam's razor would in this situation indicate the use of the simplest/fastest technique with the lowest morbidity; in this situation the transmeatal approach. Since younger age is associated with lower success rate, it is recommended to postpone surgery until the age of 7 is reached.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19735950     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2009.08.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0165-5876            Impact factor:   1.675


  10 in total

1.  Endoscopic versus microscopic type 1 tympanoplasty in the same patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Isa Kaya; Baha Sezgin; Demet Sergin; Arin Ozturk; Sevinc Eraslan; Sercan Gode; Cem Bilgen; Tayfun Kirazli
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Perhaps consider transmeatal approach for microscopic myringoplasty.

Authors:  J Borgstein; C M N Kalule
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-11-10       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Myringoplasty Quality Control Is Necessary: Comparison of Surgical Results of Two Consecutive Series in A Single Institution.

Authors:  Matti Iso-Mustajärvi; Aarno Dietz; Heikki Löppönen
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.017

4.  Cartilaginous myringoplasty: the endoscopic transcanal procedure.

Authors:  Stephane Ayache
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Transcanal microscope-assisted endoscopic myringoplasty in children.

Authors:  Lela Migirov; Michael Wolf
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 2.125

6.  Comparison of permeatal medial placement of graft without raising the tympano-meatal flaps to conventional methods of myringoplasty: An experience at tertiary care hospital in Pakistan.

Authors:  Saleem Asif Niazi; Zaheer Ul Hassan; Khaula Atif; Saeed Ullah
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.088

7.  Type 1 tympanoplasty in pediatric patients: a review of 102 cases.

Authors:  Deniz Baklaci; Ismail Guler; Ihsan Kuzucu; Rauf Oguzhan Kum; Muge Ozcan
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 2.125

8.  Specific aspects of tympanoplasty in children: A retrospective cohort study of 95 cases.

Authors:  Sanaa Mallouk; El Bouhmadi Khadi; Walid Bijou; Youssef Oukessou; Rouadi Sami; Larbi Abada Redallah; Mahtar Mohammed
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2021-04-19

Review 9.  Endoscopic tympanoplasty.

Authors:  Abdulvahap Akyigit; Oner Sakallıoglu; Turgut Karlidag
Journal:  J Otol       Date:  2017-04-28

10.  Developing a novel meatal areolar tissue autograft for minimally invasive tympanoplasty.

Authors:  Yen-Chi Chen; Chii-Yuan Huang; Ying-Ju Kuo; Hsiu-Lien Cheng; Yen-Fu Cheng; Wen Huei Liao
Journal:  J Chin Med Assoc       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 3.396

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.