The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2013
Type I tympanoplasty with island chondro-perichondral tragal graft: the preferred technique?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
De Seta E, De Seta D, Covelli E, Viccaro M, Filipo R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This retrospective, comparative study aimed to assess anatomical and functional results in a group of adults undergoing type I tympanoplasty for subtotal tympanic membrane perforation, using two different types of graft.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study included 106 patients affected by chronic otitis media, who underwent underlay type I tympanoplasty, 53 using an autologous chondro-perichondral tragal graft and 53 using temporalis fascia. Anatomical and functional outcomes were evaluated over time.
RESULTS: Audiometric results comparing the cartilage and fascia groups at six months and one year after surgery showed no statistically significant differences. Assessment of anatomical outcomes indicated a greater number of complications in the fascia group.
CONCLUSION: 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.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study included 106 patients affected by chronic otitis media, who underwent underlay type I tympanoplasty, 53 using an autologous chondro-perichondral tragal graft and 53 using temporalis fascia. Anatomical and functional outcomes were evaluated over time.
RESULTS: Audiometric results comparing the cartilage and fascia groups at six months and one year after surgery showed no statistically significant differences. Assessment of anatomical outcomes indicated a greater number of complications in the fascia group.
CONCLUSION: 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.