Dong Jo Kim1, Hyun Min Lee1, Sung-Won Choi2, Se-Joon Oh2, Soo-Keun Kong2, Il-Woo Lee3. 1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: entgate@pusan.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of endoscopes in otologic procedures has been increasing worldwide. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of microscopic tympanoplasty (MT) and endoscopic tympanoplasty (ET) for tympanic membrane and middle ear surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 81 patients who underwent MT (n = 44) and ET (n = 37) for chronic otitis media with tympanic membrane perforation performed by a single surgeon between January 2013 and September 2019. The hearing outcomes, graft success rate, complications, operation time and hospital stay, and cost-effectiveness were recorded and compared between groups. Hearing outcomes were determined by pure tone audiometry. Cost-effectiveness was determined by the operation cost and total cost. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the MT and ET groups regarding demographic characteristics, with the exception of the male:female ratio. There was no significant difference in the pre- and postoperative air conduction, bone conduction thresholds, and air-bone gap values between the two groups, but a significant audiologic improvement was observed in both groups (p < 0.05). In terms of recurrence of tympanic membrane perforation, postoperative otorrhea, and discomfort symptoms, there was no significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). The operation time and hospital stay were shorter in the ET group than in the MT group (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in operation cost between the two groups (p > 0.05), but the total cost was significantly lower in the ET group than the MT group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: ET is as safe and medically efficacious as conventional MT, shortens the operation time and hospital stay, and is cost-effective.
PURPOSE: The use of endoscopes in otologic procedures has been increasing worldwide. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of microscopic tympanoplasty (MT) and endoscopic tympanoplasty (ET) for tympanic membrane and middle ear surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 81 patients who underwent MT (n = 44) and ET (n = 37) for chronic otitis media with tympanic membrane perforation performed by a single surgeon between January 2013 and September 2019. The hearing outcomes, graft success rate, complications, operation time and hospital stay, and cost-effectiveness were recorded and compared between groups. Hearing outcomes were determined by pure tone audiometry. Cost-effectiveness was determined by the operation cost and total cost. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the MT and ET groups regarding demographic characteristics, with the exception of the male:female ratio. There was no significant difference in the pre- and postoperative air conduction, bone conduction thresholds, and air-bone gap values between the two groups, but a significant audiologic improvement was observed in both groups (p < 0.05). In terms of recurrence of tympanic membrane perforation, postoperative otorrhea, and discomfort symptoms, there was no significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). The operation time and hospital stay were shorter in the ET group than in the MT group (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in operation cost between the two groups (p > 0.05), but the total cost was significantly lower in the ET group than the MT group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: ET is as safe and medically efficacious as conventional MT, shortens the operation time and hospital stay, and is cost-effective.