Endoscopic Type 1 Tympanoplasty in Pediatric Patients Using Tragal Cartilage

Abstract

In pediatric patients undergoing type I tympanoplasty, the endoscopic approach using the tragal cartilage as a grafting material resulted in successful anatomical and functional outcomes that are in comparable to other techniques but with a shorter operation duration. Age of the patient, auditory tube dysfunction, and previous adenotonsillectomy were not prognostic factors for this procedure.

Comparison of the efficacy of endoscopic tympanoplasty and microscopic tympanoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…The TM closure rates of ET and MT were comparable (Fig. ); this finding is consistent with those of previous reports . Although only four studies were included, the risk differences of the TM closure rate between ET and MT were small (Fig.…”

“…Endoscopic tympanoplasty (ET) has been increasingly practiced since the late 1990s . The major difference between MT and ET is the surgical view.…”

“…The view during microscopic surgery is defined and limited by the narrowest segment of the ear canal, whereas transcanal endoscopy bypasses the narrowest ear canal and provides a wider view, even when a 0° endoscope is used . Therefore, ET does not require canalplasty, postauricular incision, and general anesthesia, and thus is less invasive than MT …”

“…Tympanic membrane (TM) closure rates of ET range from 80% to 100%, whereas those of MT range from 83% to 100% . Most relevant studies have been retrospective cohort studies without a comparative study design .…”

“…[3][4][5][6] Endoscopic tympanoplasty (ET) has been increasingly practiced since the late 1990s. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] The major difference between MT and ET is the surgical view. The view during microscopic surgery is defined and limited by the narrowest segment of the ear canal, whereas transcanal endoscopy bypasses the narrowest ear canal and provides a wider view, even when a 08 endoscope is used.…”