SavedAdd your journal

Journals / The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose and Throat / 2006 / Volume: 16 Issue: 6

Comparison between tympanoplasties with cartilage-perichondrium composite graft and temporal fascia graft in terms of hearing levels and healing

Kartilaj perikondriyal kompozit greft ve temporal fasya greft timpanoplastilerinde işitme ve iyileşme sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması

Ahmet Karavuş(Fatih Sultan Mehmet Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Kliniği)
Tarık Şapçı(Fatih Sultan Mehmet Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Kliniği)
Senem Almaç(Fatih Sultan Mehmet Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Kliniği)
Canan Usta(Fatih Sultan Mehmet Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Kliniği)
Ersin Mercangöz(Fatih Sultan Mehmet Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Kliniği)
Muhammed Fatih Evcimik(Fatih Sultan Mehmet Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Kulak Burun Boğaz Hastalıkları Kliniği)
Pages
—
Publication Date
2006-12-02
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

İn com­ parison with a steady increase in the cartilage group, hearing levels remained unchanged afterthe sixth month in the fascia group.Conclusion: Cartilage-perichondrium composite grafts may be easily and safely used in type I tympanoplasties, with successful results including hearing improvement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: We compared the extent of healing and hearing improvement follovving tympanoplasties per- formed with the use of cartilage-perichondrium compos­ ite grafts and temporalis muscle fascia grafts.Patients and Methods: Fifty consecutive patients 22 males, 28 females; mean age 30±14 years; range 11 to 63 years with chronic otitis media were divided into two groups to receive cartilage-perichondrium composite grafts or temporal muscle fascial grafts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:AH the patients were evaluated by pure-tone audiometry and otomicro- scopic examination in the 1 st, 3rd, 6th, and 12th months.Results: At the end of the first year, graft survival was 92% in the cartilage group, and 85% in the fascia group.Hearing levels improved at the end of the first year; how- ever, the two groups did not differ significantly in terms of hearing improvement and graft survival.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:İn com­ parison with a steady increase in the cartilage group, hearing levels remained unchanged afterthe sixth month in the fascia group.Conclusion: Cartilage-perichondrium composite grafts may be easily and safely used in type I tympanoplasties, with successful results including hearing improvement.
🔬Design:Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Cartilage/transplantation · hearing · tympanoplasty/methods

Abstract

Objectives: We compared the extent of healing and hearing improvement follovving tympanoplasties per- formed with the use of cartilage-perichondrium compos­ ite grafts and temporalis muscle fascia grafts.Patients and Methods: Fifty consecutive patients 22 males, 28 females; mean age 30±14 years; range 11 to 63 years with chronic otitis media were divided into two groups to receive cartilage-perichondrium composite grafts or temporal muscle fascial grafts. AH the patients were evaluated by pure-tone audiometry and otomicro- scopic examination in the 1 st, 3rd, 6th, and 12th months.Results: At the end of the first year, graft survival was 92% in the cartilage group, and 85% in the fascia group.Hearing levels improved at the end of the first year; how- ever, the two groups did not differ significantly in terms of hearing improvement and graft survival. Hearing gains were greater in Central and subtotal perforations. İn com­ parison with a steady increase in the cartilage group, hearing levels remained unchanged afterthe sixth month in the fascia group.Conclusion: Cartilage-perichondrium composite grafts may be easily and safely used in type I tympanoplasties, with successful results including hearing improvement.

Özet

Amaç: Over-underlay tekniğiyle, kartilaj-perikondriumkompozit grefti kullanılarak ameliyat edilen hastaların iyileşme ve işitme sonuçları, temporal kas fasyası kullanılarak ameliyat edilen hastalarla karşılaştırıldı.Hastalar ve Yöntemler: Kronik otitis media tanısı konan 50 hasta poliklinik başvuru sırasına göre iki gruba ayrıldı. Bir grubun ameliyatında kartilaj greft, diğer gruptatemporal kastan alınan fasya grefti kullanıldı. Tümhastalar 1, 3, 6 ve 12. aylarda saf ses odyometrisi veotomikroskobik muayene ile değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Bir yıl sonunda greftin tutma oranı kartilaj grubunda %92, fasya grubunda %85 idi. Birinci yıl sonundaiki grupta da işitme seviyelerinde iyileşme görüldü; ancak,işitme kazanımı ve greftin tutması iki grup arasında anlamlı farklılık göstermedi. Santral ve subtotal perforasyonlarda işitme kazanımı daha fazla idi. Ayrıca, kartilajgrubunda işitme seviyeleri bir yıl süresince sürekli artışgösterirken, fasya grubunda işitmenin altıncı aydan sonra aynı kaldığı gözlendi.Sonuç: Tip 1 timpanoplastilerde kartilaj-perikondriyumkompozit grefti, işitme kaybı endişesi olmadan kolayuygulanabilen, sonuçları başarılı bir materyaldir

🔖

Cite This Article

Karavuş, A., Şapçı, T., Almaç, S., Usta, C., Mercangöz, E., Evcimik, M. F. (2006). Comparison between tympanoplasties with cartilage-perichondrium composite graft and temporal fascia graft in terms of hearing levels and healing. The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose and Throat, Volume: 16 Issue: 6. https://ajindex.com/articles/1330044

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Glasscock III ME, Shambaugh GE. Closure of tympan- ic membrane perforations. In: Glasscock III ME, Shambaugh GE, editors. Surgery of the ear. 4th ed. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders; 1990. p. 334-49.
  2. Gerber MJ, Mason JC, Lambert PR. Hearing results after primary cartilage tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 2000;110:1994-9.
  3. Kartush JM, Michaelides EM, Becvarovski Z, LaRouere MJ. Over-under tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 2002; 112:802-7.
  4. Salen B. Myringoplasty using septum cartilage. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1964;188:Suppl 188:82+.
  5. Jansen C. Cartilage-tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 1963;73:1288-301.
  6. Dornhoffer JL. Hearing results with cartilage tym- panoplasty. Laryngoscope 1997;107:1094-9.
  7. Milewski C. Composite graft tympanoplasty in the treatment of ears with advanced middle ear pathology. Laryngoscope 1993;103:1352-6.
  8. Levinson RM. Cartilage-perichondrial composite graft tympanoplasty in the treatment of posterior marginal and attic retraction pockets. Laryngoscope 1987; 97:1069-74.
  9. Glasscock ME 3rd, Jackson CG, Nissen AJ, Schwaber MK. Postauricular undersurface tympanic membrane grafting: a follow-up report. Laryngoscope 1982;92(7 Pt 1):718-27.
  10. Mauri M, Lubianca Neto JF, Fuchs SC. Evaluation of inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Laryngoscope 2001;111:1479-85.
  11. Adkins WY. Composite autograft for tympanoplasty and tympanomastoid surgery. Laryngoscope 1990;100:244-7.
  12. Duckert LG, Muller J, Makielski KH, Helms J. Composite autograft “shield” reconstruction of rem- nant tympanic membranes. Am J Otol 1995;16:21-6.
  13. Amedee RG, Mann WJ, Riechelmann H. Cartilage pal- isade tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 1989;10:447-50.
  14. Poe DS, Gadre AK. Cartilage tympanoplasty for man- agement of retraction pockets and cholesteatomas. Laryngoscope 1993;103:614-8.
  15. Solmaz MA, Yucel EA, Ozdemir M, Guldiken Y, Deger K. Comparison of hearing levels and tympanic membrane healing obtained by cartilage palisade and temporal fascia tympanoplasty techniques: prelimi- nary results. Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtis Derg 2002;9:271-4.
  16. Vartiainen E. Findings in revision myringoplasty. Ear Nose Throat J 1993;72:201-4.
  17. Blanshard JD, Robson AK, Smith I, Maw AR. A long term view of myringoplasty in children. J Laryngol Otol 1990;104:758-62.
  18. Halik JJ, Smyth GD. Long-term results of tympanic membrane repair. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1988; 98:162-9.
  19. Kirazli T, Bilgen C, Midilli R, Ogut F. Hearing results after primary cartilage tympanoplasty with island tech- nique. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;132:933-7.
  20. Kessler A, Potsic WP, Marsh RR. Type 1 tympanoplas- ty in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;120:487-90.
  21. Koch WM, Friedman EM, McGill TJ, Healy GB. Tympanoplasty in children. The Boston Children's Hospital experience. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990;116:35-40.
  22. Lau T, Tos M. Tympanoplasty in children. An analysis of late results. Am J Otol 1986;7:55-9.
  23. Dawes JD. Myringoplasty. J Laryngol Otol 1972;86:141-6.
  24. Raine CH, Singh SD. Tympanoplasty in children. A review of 114 cases. J Laryngol Otol 1983;97:217-21.
  25. Bailey HA Jr. Symposium: Contraindications to tym- panoplasty. I. Absolute and relative contraindications. Laryngoscope 1976;86:67-9.