Cargando…
A retrospective comparative study of endoscopic and microscopic Tympanoplasty
BACKGROUND: This study compares endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty for the treatment of chronic otitis media (COM) without cholesteatoma. METHODS: This retrospective study included 153 ears (139 patients) treated surgically (endoscopic or microscopic tympanoplasty) for COM in the absence of ch...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6033204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29973286 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40463-018-0289-4 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: This study compares endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty for the treatment of chronic otitis media (COM) without cholesteatoma. METHODS: This retrospective study included 153 ears (139 patients) treated surgically (endoscopic or microscopic tympanoplasty) for COM in the absence of cholesteatoma at our hospital between January 2008 and October 2015. The adoption of transcanal endoscopic ear surgery (TEES) or microscopic ear surgery (MES) was divided temporally (before and since 2014). Comparisons between these groups focused on the following: (I) surgical outcomes, including successful tympanic membrane healing and post-operative complications; (II) restoration of hearing; and (III) consumption of medical resources, including the duration of surgery and anesthesia. All patients had a follow-up period of at least 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding surgical outcome or hearing restoration. TEES resulted in the successful healing of 96.2% of ear drums, whereas MES led to successful healing in 92% (p = 0.2826) of cases. The average hearing gains following surgery were 10.27 ± 6.4 and 12.43 ± 7.46 dB in TEES and MES, respectively. The consumption of medical resources in the TEES group was lower than that of the MES group (TEES versus MES) regarding the average operating time (87.8 ± 19.01 min (mins) versus 110.2 ± 17.0 (mins) (p < 0.0001)) and the mean duration of anesthesia ((for general anesthesia patients) (122.1 ± 21.25 mins versus 145.8 ± 16.88 mins) (p ≤ 0.0001)). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that TEES can achieve surgical outcomes and hearing restoration comparable to those of MES. In addition, TEES appears to be associated with shorter surgical and anesthesia time, which makes it an ideal alternative for the management of COM without cholesteatoma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Cathay General Hospital. (CGHIRB No: CGH-P105012). |
---|