A Comparative Study of the Efficacy of Fat Plug Myringoplasty and Conventional Myringoplasty in Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media with Small Central Perforation

  • N. Dhanapala
  • B. RamyaEmail author
  • L. Sudarshan Reddy
Original Article


Chronic Otitis Media (COM) is a major cause of acquired hearing impairment especially in developing countries. Persistent perforations occur either due to improper treatment of recurrent otitis media or infected traumatic perforation. Myringoplasty, repair of the Tympanic membrane using autologous temporalis fascia, is the standard procedure for COM. Other graft materials commonly used include tragal perichondrium, tragal cartilage and adipose tissue. This prospective study aims to compare the surgical and audiological outcome of fat plug myringoplasty [FPM] and conventional myringoplasty using temporalis fascia [CM-TF] in COM with small dry central perforation. A total of 60 patients of COM with small dry central perforation, aged 16–60 years, during the study period of October 2013 to August 2015 were divided into two groups of 30 cases each. The first group underwent FPM while the second group underwent CM-TF. The graft uptake and hearing outcome [pre operative and 3 months post operative PTA] were assessed. The surgical outcome of FPM with graft uptake of 86.7% was comparable to CM-TF with a graft uptake of 90%. The mean post operative hearing gain in FPM was 3.43 ± 2.81 dB which correlated well with that of CM-TF with 3.85 ± 3.05 dB. The duration of hospital stay and operative time was significantly lower in FPM group. FPM can be safely performed in cases with dry, small central perforations of the tympanic membrane with outcomes comparable to CM-TF.


Chronic Otitis Media Fat plug myringoplasty Conventional myringoplasty Temporalis fascia 



Chronic Otitis Media


Fat plug myringoplasty


Conventional myringoplasty using temporalis fascia


Tympanic membrane


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


  1. 1.
    Parida PK, Nochikattil SK, Surianarayanan G, Saxena SK, Ganesan S (2013) A comparative study of temporalis fascia graft and vein graft in myringoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 65(Suppl 3):S569–S574. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wasson JD, Papadimitriou CE, Pau H (2009) Myringoplasty: impact of perforation size on closure and audiological improvement. J Laryngol Otol 123(9):973–977. 2009 Jan 12) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sharma C, Singh J, Kakkar V, Yadav S, Malik P, Bishnoi S (2014) Fat graft myringoplasty in small central perforations. Indian J Otol 20:211–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arindam D, Bhavika S, Debashish G, Arunabha S (2015) Myringoplasty: impact of size and site of perforation on the success rate. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 67(2):185–189. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ajay M, Vijay B, Ravi R (2016) Effect of canalplasty on outcome of results in type I tympanoplasty. Bengal J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 24(1):15–20Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jackson CG, Kaylie DM, Glasscock ME, Strasnick B (2010) Tympanoplasty-undersurface graft technique. In: Brackmann DE, Sheiton C, Arriaga MA (eds) Otologic surgery, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Telian SA, Schmalbach CE (2003) Chronic Otitis Media. In: Snow JB, Ballenger JJ (eds) Ballenger’s otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery, 16th edn. BC Decker, Hamilton, pp 271–272Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emir H, Ceylan K, Kizilkaya Z, Gocmen H, Uzunkulaoglu H, Samim E (2007) Success is a matter of experience: type 1 tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264:595–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Debnath M, Khanna S (2013) A comparative study of closure of tympanic membrane perforation between chemical cauterization and fat plug myringoplasty. Int J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2:248–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bertoli GA, Barbaro M, Giangande V, Bava G, Seta ED, Filipo R (2007) Fat graft myringoplasty: an office procedure for the repair of small perforations of the tympanic membrane. Mediterr J Otol 3:120–125Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rao SM, Chandra PR, Pallapati G, Pradeep KJ, Gudepu P (2015) A comprehensive study of fat myringoplasty. ORL 5(1):8–13Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    El Garem HF (2014) Fat myringoplasty: better patient selection for better results. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 151(1 suppl):206–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mitchell RBI, Pereira KD, Lazar RH (1997) Fat graft myringoplasty in children-a safe and successful day-stay procedure. J Laryngol Otol 111(2):106–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fiorino F, Barbieri F (2007) Fat graft myringoplasty after unsuccessful tympanic membrane repair. Eur Arch Otolaryngol 264:1125–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Halik JJ, Smyth GDL (1988) Longterm results of tympanic membrane repair. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 98(2):162–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hegazy HM (2013) Fat graft myringoplasty—a prospective clinical study. Egypt J Ear Nose Throat Allied Sci 14:91–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Caye-Thomasen P, Nielsen TR, Tos M (2007) Bilateral myringoplasty in chronic otitis media. Laryngoscope 117(5):903–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brown C, Yi Q, McCarty DJ, Briggs RJS (2002) The success rate following myringoplasty at the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital. Aust J Otolaryngol 5(1):21–25Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gün T, Boztepe OF, Atan D, İkincioğulları A, Dere H (2016) Comparison of hyaluronic acid fat graft myringoplasty, fat graft myringoplasty and temporal fascia techniques for the closure of different sizes and sites of tympanic membrane perforations. J Int Adv Otol 12(2):137–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ENTBangalore Medical College and Research InstituteBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Osmania Medical CollegeHyderabadIndia
  3. 3.Sri Venkateshwara ENT InstituteBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations