Success is a matter of experience: type 1 tympanoplasty

Influencing factors on type 1 tympanoplasty

Abstract

Our objective was to identify the factors that could influence the success rate of type 1 tympanoplasty in a tertiary care centre where both residents and senior surgeons perform this operation. Six hundred and seven patients who had been performed type 1 tympanoplasty as a primary otologic surgery between January 1997 and December 2004 were retrospectively chart reviewed. The patients had intact and mobile ossicular chain peroperatively. Patients with any other macroscopic otologic pathology like cholesteatoma, granulation in the middle ear and osteitis in mastoid cells were excluded from the study. Dry ear, intact and mobile tympanic membrane, improvement of the hearing by at least 10 dB and air-bone gap less than 25 dB were accepted as success criteria after 12 months of follow-up period. Chi-square test was used for statistical comparison of the different influencing factors. The male gender, younger age, smaller-sized perforations and experience of the surgeon were stated as good prognostic factors due to statistical evaluation. Afterwards the data of the study group was reanalysed in order to decide the cases for the residents. Finally, it was observed that seniors had better results in cases with perforations greater than 50%, dry ears and patients older than 16 years. In training and research clinics where both residents and senior surgeons perform type 1 tympanoplasty, the rate of success can be enhanced if patients with perforations greater than 50%, dry ears and patients older than 16 years are operated by the senior surgeons. The reason for this is that these groups have the overall worse results and should by argument be done by senior surgeons.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Fisch U, May J (eds) (1994) Tympanoplasty, mastoidectomy and stapes surgery. Thieme, New York

  2. 2.

    Sheahan P, O’Dwyer T, Blayney A (2002) Results of type 1 tympanoplasty and parental perceptions of outcome of surgery. J Laryngol Otol 116:430–434

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Tos M, Lau T (1989) Stability of tympanoplasty in children. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 22:15–28

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Adkins WY, White B (1984) Type 1 tympanoplasty : Influencing factors. Laryngoscope 94:916–918

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Vartiainen E, Nuutinen J (1993) Success and pitfalls in myringoplasty: follow-up study of 404 cases. Am J Otol 14:301–305

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Pignataro L, Berta LGD, Capaccio P, Zaghis A (2001) Myringoplasty in children: anatomical and functional results. J Laryngol Otol 115:369–373

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Caylan R, Titiz A, Falcioni M, De Donato G, Russo A, Taibah AA (1998) Myringoplasty in children: Factors influencing surgical outcome. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 118:709–713

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Halik JH, Smyth GDL (1988) Long term results of tympanic membrane repair. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 98:162–169

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Mak D, Mackendrick A, Bulsara M, Coates H, Lannigan F, Lehmann D, Leidwinger L, Weeks S (2004) Outcomes of myringoplasty in Australian Aboriginal children and factors associated with success: a prospective case series. Clin Otolaryngol 29:606–611

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Podoshin L, Fradis M, Malatskey S, Ben-David J (1996) Type 1 tympanoplasty in children. Am J Otol 17:293–296

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    De S, Karkanevatos A, Srinivasan VR, Lesser THJ (2004) Myringoplasty using a subcutaneous soft tissue graft. Clin Otolaryngol 29:314–317

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Jurovitzki I, Sade J (1988) Myringoplasty: long term follow up. A J Otol 9:52–55

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Isaacson G (1994) Tympanoplasty in children. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 27:593–605

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Kessler A, Potsic WP (1994) Marsh RR. Type 1 tympanoplasty in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 120:487–490

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Goodman WS, Wallace IR (1980) Tympanoplasty—25 years later. J Otolaryngol 9:155–164

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Raine CH, Singh SD (1983) Tympanoplasty in children. J Laryngol Otol 97:217–221

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Van Baarle PWL, Huygen PLM, Brinkman WFB (1983) Findings in surgery for chronic otitis media. A retrospective data-analysis of 2225 cases followed for two years. Clin Otolaryngol 8:151–158

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Hilmi OJ, Bolton P, Ahsan F, Nunez DA (2004) Training opportunities for specialist registrars post-calmanization: audit of trainees’ exposure to repair of the tympanic membrane. J Laryngol Otol 4:409–412

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Palva T, Ramsay H (1995) Myringoplasty and tympanoplasty-results related to training and experience. Clin Otolaryngol 20:329–335

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Lau T, Tos M (1986) Tympanoplasty in children: an analysis of late results. Am J Otol 7:55–59

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Black JH, Wormald PJ (1995) Myringoplasty-effects on hearing and contributing factors. S Afr Med J 85:41–43

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank P.Sc.Salih Ergocen for the statistical analysis of the clinical data. Appreciation is expressed for the insight of Associate Professor Pasa Tevfik Cephe from Gazi University English Literature Department during the course of this manuscript preparation.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kursat Ceylan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Emir, H., Ceylan, K., Kizilkaya, Z. et al. Success is a matter of experience: type 1 tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264, 595–599 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-006-0240-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Type-1 tympanoplasty
  • Influencing factors
  • Experience of surgeon