Acta otorrinolaringologica espanola · 2018
Island cartilage vs temporalis fascia in type 1 tympanoplasty: A prospective study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jain Avani, Samdani Sunil, Sharma Man Prakash, Meena Vinod
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: (1) To compare the results of graft take-up and audiological outcome of temporalis fascia versus island cartilage graft in type 1 tympanoplasty. (2) To compare the rate of postoperative retraction of neotympanum in both.
METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 70 patients of ages ranging from 11 to 50 years with dry subtotal perforation. 35 underwent island cartilage tympanoplasty and 35 underwent type 1 tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia graft. Graft acceptance rates and post-operative audiograms were compared.
RESULTS: At one year follow up, the graft take-up rate for temporalis fascia and island cartilage graft were found to be 82.9% and 97.1% respectively, which was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05). In the temporalis fascia group, two out of 35 patients (5.7%) had retraction of the neo tympanum. There was no incidence of retraction using island cartilage graft. There was no significant difference in the postoperative air-bone gap gain between temporalis fascia graft and island cartilage graft.
CONCLUSION: Island cartilage tympanoplasty shows a high degree of reliability in high risk cases. It has a higher graft take-up rate with no incidence of retraction of neotympanum. Moreover, it provided significant hearing improvement in our patients.
METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on 70 patients of ages ranging from 11 to 50 years with dry subtotal perforation. 35 underwent island cartilage tympanoplasty and 35 underwent type 1 tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia graft. Graft acceptance rates and post-operative audiograms were compared.
RESULTS: At one year follow up, the graft take-up rate for temporalis fascia and island cartilage graft were found to be 82.9% and 97.1% respectively, which was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05). In the temporalis fascia group, two out of 35 patients (5.7%) had retraction of the neo tympanum. There was no incidence of retraction using island cartilage graft. There was no significant difference in the postoperative air-bone gap gain between temporalis fascia graft and island cartilage graft.
CONCLUSION: Island cartilage tympanoplasty shows a high degree of reliability in high risk cases. It has a higher graft take-up rate with no incidence of retraction of neotympanum. Moreover, it provided significant hearing improvement in our patients.