Literature DB >> 28929072

Type 1 Tympanoplasty by Cartilage Palisade and Temporalis Fascia Technique: A Comparison.

Nikhil Arora1, J C Passey1, A K Agarwal1, R Bansal1.   

Abstract

(1) To compare graft take up of type-1 tympanoplasty with cartilage palisade technique with those of type-1 tympanoplasty using autotemporalis fascia. (2) To compare hearing results of type 1 tympanoplasty with cartilage palisade technique with those of type-1 tympanoplasty using autotemporalis fascia. A prospective clinical study. It consisted of 60 patients divided into two groups of 30 patients each. After randomization 30 patients underwent type 1 tympanoplasty using cartilage palisade technique and 30 underwent type 1 tympanoplasty using autotemporalis fascia. In follow up, pure tone audiogram were carried out at 2nd, 4th and 6th month. Clinical assessment was done at 2nd 4th and 6th month. The graft uptake rate between the group 1 and group 2 are 93.33 and 90% respectively. As p value was greater than 0.05 so statistically there is no significant difference between the two group. The post operative air bone gap of the two groups were compared using student t test. The pre op mean of group 1 was 32.5 db and pre op mean of group 2 was 30.66 db. The post op mean of group 1 was 21.33, with standard deviation of 3.6984 and standard error of 0.67523. The post op mean of group 2 was 21.09 with standard deviation of 3.29 and standard error of 0.58261. t value was 0.1357. Analysis was done using student t test and p value was found to be greater than 0.05. p value is greater than 0.05 which shows that there is no statistical difference between the two groups. This study establishes the fact that hearing results after performing type 1 tympanoplasty by autotemporalis fascia when compared with type 1 tympanoplasty performed by cartilage palisade technique showed similar hearing gain and post operatively graft take up rate was also similar in two groups. The disadvantage of reducing the mechanical vibration of the tympanic membrane was overcome by the palisade reconstruction of the tympanic membrane. This study definitely emphasizes upon usage of new grafting materials in reconstruction of tympanic membrane, with similar, if not better functional results, without compromising the acoustic transfer characteristics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cartilage; Chronic otitis media; Tympanoplasty

Year:  2017        PMID: 28929072      PMCID: PMC5581766          DOI: 10.1007/s12070-017-1137-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 2231-3796


  13 in total

1.  Hearing results after primary cartilage tympanoplasty.

Authors:  M J Gerber; J C Mason; P R Lambert
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 2.  [The Heermann "cartilage palisade tympanoplasty"].

Authors:  A Neumann
Journal:  HNO       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 3.  Cartilage tympanoplasty.

Authors:  John L Dornhoffer
Journal:  Otolaryngol Clin North Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.346

4.  Cartilage tympanoplasty for management of retraction pockets and cholesteatomas.

Authors:  D S Poe; A K Gadre
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  Cartilage palisade tympanoplasty.

Authors:  R G Amedee; W J Mann; H Riechelmann
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1989-11

6.  Palisade cartilage tympanoplasty for management of subtotal perforations: a comparison with the temporalis fascia technique.

Authors:  K Cagdas Kazikdas; Kazim Onal; Ismail Boyraz; Erdem Karabulut
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2007-03-31       Impact factor: 2.503

7.  Type I tympanoplasty: influencing factors.

Authors:  W Y Adkins; B White
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Cartilage plate tympanoplasty.

Authors:  Dirk Beutner; Karl-Bernd Huttenbrink; Robert Stumpf; Thomas Beleites; Thomas Zahnert; Jan-Christoffer Luers; Victor Helmstaedter
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Acoustic properties of different cartilage reconstruction techniques of the tympanic membrane.

Authors:  Dirk Mürbe; Thomas Zahnert; Matthias Bornitz; Karl-Bernd Hüttenbrink
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  A tympanometric comparison of tympanoplasty with cartilage palisades or fascia after surgery for tensa cholesteatoma in children.

Authors:  Cem Uzun; Per Cayé-Thomasen; Janne Andersen; Mirko Tos
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.325

View more
  5 in total

1.  Vertical Strut Ossiculoplasty: A Versatile Alternate to Conventional Techniques-A Randomized study.

Authors:  Yogendra Kumar Saini; Pawan Singhal; K P Surendra Prabhu; Sushmitha Nagaraj; Shivam Sharma; Rajeev Yadav; Bhawani Singh Aeron; Sudeep Munjal; Man Prakash Sharma
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2021-05-18

2.  Long-term results of type I tympanoplasty with perichondrium reinforced cartilage palisade vs temporalis fascia for large perforations: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Dipesh Shakya; Ajit Nepal
Journal:  J Otol       Date:  2020-07-29

3.  Palisade Cartilage Tympanoplasty, an Alternative Surgical Approach for CSOM.

Authors:  Shahid Rasool; Shifa Qureshi; Ashima Varshney; Simmi Hassan; Faiza Kokab; Khaja Naseeruddin
Journal:  Iran J Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-07

4.  Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Bucket Handle and Cartilage Tympanoplasty Techniques for the Reconstruction of Subtotal or Anterior Tympanic Membrane Perforation.

Authors:  Alimohamad Asghari; Mohammad Mohseni; Ahmad Daneshi; Yasser Nasoori; Sara Rostami; Maryam Balali
Journal:  Int J Otolaryngol       Date:  2018-05-22

5.  Type 1 tympanoplasty in patients with large perforations: Comparison of temporalis fascia, partial-thickness cartilage, and full-thickness cartilage.

Authors:  Caixia Xing; Hong Liu; Guodong Li; Jianfeng Li; Xin Li
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 1.671

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.