Type I tympanoplasty with island chondro-perichondral tragal graft: the preferred technique?

Abstract

Functional results indicate the validity of the cartilage tympanoplasty, while anatomical results indicate a slightly better outcome in terms of graft re-perforation and retraction, compared with temporalis fascia at one-year follow up. These results suggest that the cartilage technique is preferable for type I tympanoplasty.

Comparison of cartilage with temporalis fascia tympanoplasty: A meta‐analysis of comparative studies

“…A total of 37 articles were finally included in our meta‐analysis, resulting in a pooled population of 3,606 patients: 1,795 undergoing cartilage tympanoplasty and 1,811 undergoing fascia tympanoplasty. There were 11 PCSs, three of which were randomized .…”

“…There were 11 PCSs, three of which were randomized . The remaining 26 comparative studies were retrospective . Three prospective studies and 12 retrospective studies were considered as low‐bias studies (see the online Supporting Table SI about the characteristics of the included studies).…”

“…Data regarding graft integration rate (Fig. ) were available for 35 eligible articles (11 prospective studies and 24 retrospective studies). Fifteen of them were at low risk of bias (score ≥ 5 in the quality assessment).…”

“…Regarding island tympanoplasty (group E), data about graft integration rate, ABG closure of < 10 dB, and postoperative mean ABG were available for 18, 7, and 11 studies, respectively. The graft integration rate resulted in a statistical significance (RD = 0.11; 95% CI [0.08; 0.14]; P < 0.001).…”

“…Overall, eight studies presented results in only adults. Palisade (group A), thin and thick plate (group B), island (group C), and island (group E) techniques were used. The graft integration rate resulted in a statistical significance (RD = 0.13; 95% CI [0.03; 0.23]; P = 0.008).…”