Medial versus Medio-lateral Tympanoplasty in Large Central and Subtotal Perforation – A Prospective Study

Main Article Content

Ajoy Khaowas
Chiranjib Das

Abstract

Introduction:


Large central and subtotal tympanic membrane (TM) perforations are difficult to repair because of less vascularity of anterior TM than posterior TM and the anterior bony overhang that blocks visualization. Some studies reported very encouraging results with the medio-lateral tympanoplasty in such cases. We have undertaken this study to find out efficacy of this technique in large central and subtotal perforations and to compare the results of medio-lateral with medial tympanoplasty.


Materials and Methods:


The present prospective study was conducted in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology of a medical college and hospital, West Bengal from January 2013 to December 2014. Patients were alternatively divided into two groups. Medial technique was used in Group I and medio-lateral technique was used in Group II.   


Results:


Each group comprised of 40 patients each. Maximum number of patients in each group was in the age group of 15-25 years. The overall graft uptake rate in this study was 95% in medio-lateral technique compared to 80% of underlay technique.


Conclusion:


The medio-lateral tympanoplasty is suitable for reconstruction of large central or subtotal TM perforation. It takes advantage of both medial and lateral grafting methods while avoiding their pitfalls.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Khaowas A, Das C. Medial versus Medio-lateral Tympanoplasty in Large Central and Subtotal Perforation – A Prospective Study. BJOHNS [Internet]. 2019Apr.30 [cited 2024Nov.5];27(1):44-50. Available from: https://bjohns.in/journal3/index.php/bjohns/article/view/224
Section
Main article
Author Biographies

Ajoy Khaowas, KPC Medical College & Hospital, Kolkata

Assistant Professor, Dept of ENT

Chiranjib Das, Coochbehar Govt. Medical College & Hospital, West Bengal

Assistant Professor, ENT

References

Sade J, Berco E, Brown M, Weinberg J, Auraham S. Myringoplasty – short and long term results in a training program. J Laryngol Otol. 1981; 95:635-65

Booth JB. Myringoplasty : the reasons of failure. J Laryngol Otol. 1974; 88:1223-36

Applebaum EL, Deutsch EC. An endoscopic method of tympanic membrane fluorescein angiography. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1986; 99:439-43

Farrior JB. Sandwich graft tympanoplasty: experience, results, and complications, Laryngoscope 1989; 99:213-7

Weider DJ. Use of the Williams microclip in various aspects of tymanoplastic surgery, Laryngoscope 1981; 91 (12):2106-25

Kartush JM, Michaelides EM, Becvarovski Z, LaRouere MJ. Over-under tympanoplasty, Laryngoscope 2002; 112 (5):802-7

Park SK, Jung TT. Mediolateral graft tympanoplasty for anterior or subtotal tympanic membrane perforation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005; 132:532-6

Bhat NA, De R. Retrospective analysis of surgical outcome, symptoms changes and hearing improvement following myringoplasty. J Laryngol Otol. 2000; 29:229-32

Schuknecht HF. Myringoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol. 1976; 2:53-65

Rizer FM. Overlay versus underlay tympanoplasty part I: historical review of the literature, part II: the study. Laryngoscope 1997; 107:26-36

Wehrs RE. Grafting technique. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1999; 32:448-55

Glasscock ME. Tympanic membrane grafting with fascia overlay vs underlay technique. Laryngoscope 1973; 83:754-70

Doyle PJ, Schleuning AJ, Echevarria J. Tympanoplasty: should grafts be placed medial or lateral to the tympanic membrane. Laryngoscope 1972; 82:1425-30

Mendel L, Kuylenstierna RA. Clinical comparison of results of two different methods of closing tympanic membrane perforations. J Laryngol Otol. 1985; 99:339-42

Packer P, Mackendrick A, Solar M. Whats best in myringoplasty: underlay or overlay, dura or fascia? J Laryngol Otol. 1982; 96:25-41

Gulati SP, Sachdeva OP, Thakral A, Jain P, Sachdeva A. A comparative evalution of onlay and inlay techniques in myringoplasty. The Indian Practitioner 1997; 50:123-4

Stage J, Bak-Pederson K. Underlay tympanoplasty with the graft lateral to the malleus handle. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1992; 17:6-9

Kartush JM, Michaelides EM, Becvarovski Z et al. Over-under tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 2002; 112:802-7

Cody DT, Taylor WF. Tympanoplasty: long term results. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1973; 82:538-47

Hung T, Knight JR, Sankar V. Anterosuperior anchoring myringoplasty technique for anterior and subtotal perforations. Clin Otolaryngol. 2004; 29:210-14

Gerlinger I, Rath G, Szanyi I, Pytel J. Myringoplasty for anterior and subtotal perforation using KTP-532 laser. Eur Arch Otorhinolarngol. 2006; 263:816-19

Jung T, Kim YH, Kim YH, Park SK, Martin D. Medial or medio-lateral graft tympanoplasty for repair of tympanic membrane perforation. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2009; 73:941-3

Nagle SK, Jagade MV, Gandhi SR, Pawar PV. Comparative study of outcome of type I tympanoplasty in dry and wet ear. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009; 61:138-40

Smyth GDL. Tympanic reconstruction: Fifteen year report on tympanoplasty Part-II. J Laryngol Otol.1967; 90:713-41.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>