Panel on Myringoplasty Methods

House, Howard P.; House, William F.; Tabb, Harold G.; Wullstein, Horst; Zöllner, Fritz

doi:10.1001/archotol.78.3.88

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Myringoplasty was originally described by Berthold in 1878 using full thickness skin grafts for TM repair, and techniques have been developed since then to improve success. 8,9 Many variations have been developed over the years, including various approaches to the perforation, materials used, and stabilization techniques. [10][11][12][13] The medial technique is commonly utilized and is technically straightforward, as the graft is placed medial to the remaining TM and malleus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Over–under versus medial tympanoplasty: Comparison of benefit, success, and hearing results

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis A hybrid variation of a tympanoplasty technique, termed over–under tympanoplasty (OUT), was evaluated to demonstrate the long‐term outcomes and complications compared to medial tympanoplasty. Study Design Retrospective review. Methods Patients who underwent a tympanoplasty between 2010 and 2015 were included. Primary outcome measures included graft healing at 18 months, change in air‐bone gap (ABG), and change in high‐frequency hearing at 8 kHz. The Shapiro‐Wilk test, Student t test, and nonparametric Mann‐Whitney test were used to compare results. Univariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify potential predictors of surgical success. Results One hundred eleven patients were included; 84 underwent the over–under technique and 27 underwent medial tympanoplasty. At the 18‐month follow‐up, 100% of patients in the medial tympanoplasty group had closure of the TM perforation compared to 84% (71/84) in the over–under group. In the over–under group, 12% of patients developed small or pinpoint perforations, and 4% developed larger, recurrent perforations. Mean improvement in ABG was similar between the two groups (11.6 dB for the medial group vs. 11.9 dB for the over–under group, P < .001). No hearing loss was noted in either group. No lateralization of the graft or anterior blunting was noted. Conclusions In this series, the OUT technique had a high success rate with TM perforations, including anterior, near total, and total perforations. Hearing loss from dissection on the malleus was not found. This approach blends the advantages and minimizes the disadvantages of the classic techniques and is well suited for all types of tympanic membrane perforations. Level of Evidence 3b Laryngoscope, 129:1206–1210, 2019

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Over–under versus medial tympanoplasty: Comparison of benefit, success, and hearing results

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Over the years, various techniques have been attempted to improve tympanoplasty results. These include overlay tympanoplasty, 14 underlay tympanoplasty, 15 "Gelfilm sandwich" tympanoplasty, 16 "Crowncork" tympanoplasty, 17 "swinging door" tympanoplasty, 18 laserassisted "spot welding" techniques, 19 fascial pegging, 20 and microclip techniques. 21 Office tympanoplasty techniques have also been described, including paper patching, lobule fat graft and, more recently, self-stabilizing tympanic membrane patchers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Over‐Under Tympanoplasty

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To name a few most commonly used techniques are underlay, interlay, overlay, sandwich and double breasting techniques. [6][7][8][9][10][11] Out of these techniques the most commonly used techniques are underlay, interlay, and overlay. Each technique has its own advantages as well as disadvantages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interlay versus underlay type 1 tympanoplasty: a comparative study of the techniques in 100 cases

Sharma

Goyal

et al. 2018

Int J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Type 1 tympanoplasty is a surgical technique used to restore the integrity of tympanic membrane as well as to improve hearing level in patients with large central perforations (inactive mucosal chronic otitis media). Methods: This is a randomized prospective study of 12 month duration from January 2017 to December 2017 in 100 patients of chronic otitis media inactive mucosal type with large central perforation admitted in the E.N.T department at Geetanjali Medical College and Hospital, Udaipur. Results: The graft uptake rate in the present study was found to be 96% and 90% respectively in interlay and underlay techniques. Post operatively after 12 weeks mean air bone gap was maximum reduced in Interlay tympanoplasty. Conclusions:The present study showed that Interlay technique had a better graft take rate as well as hearing improvement in large central perforation of chronic otitis media than the underlay technique.

show abstract

Panel on Myringoplasty Methods

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Over–under versus medial tympanoplasty: Comparison of benefit, success, and hearing results

Over–under versus medial tympanoplasty: Comparison of benefit, success, and hearing results

Over‐Under Tympanoplasty

Interlay versus underlay type 1 tympanoplasty: a comparative study of the techniques in 100 cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About