<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Leading cause of deafness in India is chronic suppurative otitis media. Most common cause of TM perforation is chronic suppurative otitis media. With this background this study was to compare hearing results, as well as graft takes for commonly preferred reconstruction techniques of the TM (i.e., temporalis fascia vs. cartilage) in tympanoplasty.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The present study consists of 60 cases of C.S.O.M (TTD) which was divided into two groups with 30 cases in each group. In first group type1 tympanoplasty was done by Temporalis fascia technique. In second group type 1 tympanoplasty done by tragal cartilage with perichondrium technique. History and otoscopic examination along with pure tone audiometry was performed preoperatively. Postoperative hearing results and graft uptake were compared between two groups, all surgeries were performed through the post aural approach.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Graft uptake results are better with tragal cartilage with perichondrium technique. Hearing improved significantly in both groups. Though this was slightly better in TFT, but not significant statistically.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Graft uptake rates are better with the tragal cartilage with perichondrium technique in comparison of TFT and hearing results are almost equivalent with both techniques.</p>

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> In ENT adenoidectomy is a commonly performed surgery. It is conventionally done using the curettage method. This present study aims to evaluate endoscopic assisted curettage<strong> </strong>adenoidectomy as an alternative.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The present study consisted of forty cases requiring adenoidectomy were divided into two groups of twenty each. In Group A adenoidectomy was done by conventional curettage method and in Group B by endoscopic assisted micro-debrider adenoidectomy. The parameters studied between two groups were intra-operative time, intra-operative bleeding and completeness of resection .The study period was from June 2015 to December 2016.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> The average time taken in Group A (conventional surgery) was 5.30 minutes and in Group B (powered endoscopic surgery) was 12.30 minute. The average blood loss in Group A was 35 ml (range 10–50) as compared to 30 ml in Group B. Nearly 25 % of the patients who underwent endoscopic assisted adenoidectomy had grade II adenoids. About 30% of the patients who underwent conventional adenoidectomy had Grade III adenoids. A total of 10% of the patients developed primary haemorrhage which was more in conventional adenoidectomy (15%) as compared to endoscopic adenoidectomy (5%).</p><strong>Conclusions:</strong>Endoscopic assisted microdebrider adenoidectomy was found to be a safe and effective tool for adenoidectomy. Endoscopic adenoidectomy better for completeness of resection, accurate resection under vision. On the other hand, in conventional adenoidectomy operative time and intra-operative bleeding was less.<p> </p>