Dergiler / KBB-Forum / 2020 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1

COMPARING THE ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUE WITH THE MICROSCOPIC BUTTERFLY CARTILAGE TYMPANOPLASTY

Sayfa
140–144
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: There is a similarity between the microscopic and endoscopic groups in terms of the successful graft rate and the hearing outcomes.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: To investigate the differences between endoscopic and microscopic butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Mean audiometric results were evaluated among the groups before surgery and six months after surgery at 500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, and 4000 Hz at air and bone conduction thresholds.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: There is a similarity between the microscopic and endoscopic groups in terms of the successful graft rate and the hearing outcomes.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2000 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objectives: To investigate the differences between endoscopic and microscopic butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty. Material and Methods: Eighty-seven patients under endoscopic and microscopic butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty was done. Mean audiometric results were evaluated among the groups before surgery and six months after surgery at 500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, and 4000 Hz at air and bone conduction thresholds. Air conduction pure tone audiometry (PTA), air-bone gap reduction, air-bone gap (ABG) and hearing gain before and after surgery were calculated after surgery. Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the groups respectively in terms of the mean ABG before and after surgery (24.9±7.5 dB vs. 23.7±6.5 dB; 16.7 dB ± 5.2 vs. 15.9 dB ±5.8dB). Both groups showed significantly lower ABG after surgery than that before surgery (p<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the microscopic tympanoplasty group and the endoscopic tympanoplasty group (8.2±5.9 dB vs. 7.8±5.3 dB, (p=0.896) in terms of the mean improvement of the ABG. Conclusion: There is a similarity between the microscopic and endoscopic groups in terms of the successful graft rate and the hearing outcomes.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

SEVİL, E., DOBLAN, A. (2020). COMPARING THE ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUE WITH THE MICROSCOPIC BUTTERFLY CARTILAGE TYMPANOPLASTY. KBB-Forum, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1, 140–144. https://ajindex.com/articles/165466

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (1)

  1. Acar M, Yazici D, San T, NB Muluk, Cingi C. Fat-plug myringoplasty of ear lobule vs abdominal donor sites. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 272:861-6. 2.Hod R, Buda I, Hazan A, Nageris BI. Inlay "butterfly" cartilage tympanoplasty. Am J Otolaryngol 2013; 34:41-3. 3.Tos M. Cartilage tympanoplasty methods: proposal of a classification. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008; 139:747-58. 4.Eavey RD. Inlay tympanoplasty: cartilage butterfly technique. Laryngoscope 1998; 108:657-61. 5.Thomassin JM, Duchon-Doris JM, Emram B, Rud C, Conciatori J, Vilcog P. Endoscopic ear surgery. Initial evaluation. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 1990; 107:564-70. 6.Tarabichi M. Endoscopic transcanal middle ear surgery. Indian J. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 2010; 62:6-24. 7.Kim HJ, Kim MJ, Jeon JH, Kim JM, Moon IS, Lee WS. Functional and practical outcomes of inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35:1458-62. 8.Ghanem MA, Monroy A, Alizade FS, Nicalou Y, Eavey RD. Butterfly cartilage graft inlay tympanoplasty for large perforations. Laryngoscope 2006; 116:1813-6. 9.Özgür A, Dursun E, Terzi S, Erdivanlı ÖÇ, Çoşkun ZÖ, Ogurlu M, Demirci M. Endoscopic butterfly cartilage myringoplasty. Acta Otolaryngol 2016; 136:144-8. 10.Akyigit A, Karlidag T, Keles E, Kaygusuz I, Yalcın S, Polat C, Eroglu O. Endoscopic cartilage butterfly myringoplasty in children. Auris Nasus Larynx 2017; 44:152-5. 11.Lee SA, Kang HT, Lee YJ, Kim BG, Lee JD. Microscopic versus endoscopic inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty. J Audiol Otol, 2019;23:140.144. 12.Kuo CH, Wu HM. Comparison of endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 274:2727-32. 13.Mehta RP, Rosowski JJ, Voss SE, Oneil E, Merchant SN. Determinants of hearing loss in perforations of the tympanic membrane. Otol Neurotol. 2006; 27:136-43. 14.Park H, Hong SN, Kim HS, Han JJ, Chung J, Suh MW, Oh SH, Chang SO, Lee JH. Determinants of conductive hearing loss in tympanic membrane perforation. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2015; 8:92-6.