Acta oto-laryngologica · 2026
Comparison between regenerative therapy with basic fibroblast growth factor and myringoplasty for tympanic membrane perforation.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Yamashita Yasuhiko, Noda Yohei, Hirai Yu, Moriwaki Yuto, Naka Kikuko, Ueno Yusuke, Kariya Shin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: No reports have been identified comparing the treatment outcomes of tympanoplasty using autologous tissue and fibrin glue with those of tympanic membrane regeneration therapy based on basic fibroblast growth factor.
AIMS/OBJECTIVES: To compare the surgical outcomes in relation to tympanic membrane regeneration therapy and myringoplasty for tympanic membrane perforation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The present study comprised a total of 23 ears of tympanic membrane regeneration therapy and 8 ears of myringoplasty, as performed at our hospital between January 2022 and December 2024. Gender, age, anesthetic method, operative time, tympanic membrane perforation closure rate, and postoperative hearing improvement in ears with perforation closure were compared between the two groups.Furthermore, in the regenerative therapy group, postoperative satisfaction was subjectively assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
RESULTS: In comparison with tympanoplasty, tympanic membrane regeneration therapy demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in operative time. However, no other statistically significant differences were observed. The VAS results indicate an average hearing improvement of 62.7, and an average overall satisfaction with the surgery of 77.5.
CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Regenerative therapy has the potential to become a new treatment option because it is less invasive than myringoplasty.
AIMS/OBJECTIVES: To compare the surgical outcomes in relation to tympanic membrane regeneration therapy and myringoplasty for tympanic membrane perforation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The present study comprised a total of 23 ears of tympanic membrane regeneration therapy and 8 ears of myringoplasty, as performed at our hospital between January 2022 and December 2024. Gender, age, anesthetic method, operative time, tympanic membrane perforation closure rate, and postoperative hearing improvement in ears with perforation closure were compared between the two groups.Furthermore, in the regenerative therapy group, postoperative satisfaction was subjectively assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
RESULTS: In comparison with tympanoplasty, tympanic membrane regeneration therapy demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in operative time. However, no other statistically significant differences were observed. The VAS results indicate an average hearing improvement of 62.7, and an average overall satisfaction with the surgery of 77.5.
CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Regenerative therapy has the potential to become a new treatment option because it is less invasive than myringoplasty.