Yasser Mohammad Hassan Mandour1, Samira Mohammed2, M O Abdel Menem3. 1. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Benha University, Egypt. Electronic address: ghader__massoud@yahoo.com. 2. Faculty of science, Benha University, Egypt. Electronic address: Samira.salam@fsc.b.edu.eg. 3. Faculty of science, Benha University, Egypt.
Abstract
OBJECT: To compare between results of bacterial cellulose graft myringoplasty and fat graft myingoplasty in patients had mild or moderate size safe perforation. METHODS:120 patients undergoing myringoplasty due to mild or moderate size perforation were divided into 3 groups: group I: 40 patients undergoingmyringoplasty with use of bacterial cellulose graft, group II: 40 patients undergoing myringoplasty with use of fat graft, group III: 40 patients undergoing usual myringoplasty with use of temporalis fascia graft (control group). RESULTS: Healing in 20 patients with small perforation and 17 patients withmoderate perforation in Group I, Healing in 15 patients with small perforation and 10 patients with moderate perforation in Group II, Healing in 18 patients with small perforation and 12 patients with moderate perforation in Group III. CONCLUSION: Bacterial cellulose graft myringoplasty would be a good, simple, rapid and safe surgery that could be done under local anesthesia in outpatient clinic with shorter time of surgery than fat graft myringoplasty and temporalis fascia graft myringoplasty, with better hearing and healing. SUMMARY AT GLANCE: 120 patients undergoing myringoplasty were divided into 3 groups to compare between results of bacterial cellulose graft myringoplasty, fat graft myringoplasty and temporalis fascia graft myringoplasty.
RCT Entities:
OBJECT: To compare between results of bacterial cellulose graft myringoplasty and fat graft myingoplasty in patients had mild or moderate size safe perforation. METHODS: 120 patients undergoing myringoplasty due to mild or moderate size perforation were divided into 3 groups: group I: 40 patients undergoing myringoplasty with use of bacterial cellulose graft, group II: 40 patients undergoing myringoplasty with use of fat graft, group III: 40 patients undergoing usual myringoplasty with use of temporalis fascia graft (control group). RESULTS: Healing in 20 patients with small perforation and 17 patients with moderate perforation in Group I, Healing in 15 patients with small perforation and 10 patients with moderate perforation in Group II, Healing in 18 patients with small perforation and 12 patients with moderate perforation in Group III. CONCLUSION: Bacterial cellulose graft myringoplasty would be a good, simple, rapid and safe surgery that could be done under local anesthesia in outpatient clinic with shorter time of surgery than fat graft myringoplasty and temporalis fascia graft myringoplasty, with better hearing and healing. SUMMARY AT GLANCE: 120 patients undergoing myringoplasty were divided into 3 groups to compare between results of bacterial cellulose graft myringoplasty, fat graft myringoplasty and temporalis fascia graft myringoplasty.