Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Are bovine pericardium underlay xenograft and butterfly inlay autograft efficient for transcanal tympanoplasty?

  • Otology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Letter to the Editor to this article was published on 11 November 2016

Abstract

To evaluate the success rate and the surgical procedure of two different transcanal myringoplasty techniques using the Tutopatch® (Tutogen Medical, Inc., Alachua, FL, USA), a xenograft produced from bovine pericardium or the butterfly, an inlay tragal cartilage autograft. This is a retrospective study. We studied all cases of transcanal myringoplasty with Tutopatch and butterfly, performed by the same surgeon between April 2005 and May 2013. Perforations were secondary to chronic otitis media without cholesteatoma, perforation post ventilation tube or trauma. They were not exceeding one-third of the tympanic membrane surface for the Tutopatch and one quarter for the butterfly. We evaluated the anatomical success rate, complications and postoperative hearing results in both techniques. A total of 106 myringoplasties were performed: 66 with Tutopatch and 40 with butterfly with a mean follow-up of 16.5 and 5.2 months, respectively. Successful closure rates of Tutopatch and butterfly were 75.8 % (P < 0.0001) and 85.0 % (P < 0.0001), respectively. Myringitis controlled with topical antibiotics treatment occurred in 8 (12.1 %) and 5 (12.5 %) cases. Eighty percent of patients with Tutopatch had a mean residual air-bone gap within 10 dB, compared to 85.0 % in patients with butterfly. When anatomically feasible, a transcanal approach myringoplasty with a Tutopatch® graft or butterfly appears to provide good anatomical and functional results. We show that both techniques provide good anatomical and functional results. The butterfly has the advantage to use an autograft, which is surgically easier because it does not require tympanomeatal flap elevation. We recommend the butterfly technique for non-marginal perforation not exceeding one quarter of the tympanic membrane after excision of the perforation edge and Tutopatch for bigger perforation or when standard autografts are not available. Myringitis is the only described complication without specific incidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. (1994) Viral inactivation study during the Tutoplast allografts manufacturing process. Institut Pasteur texcel. Paris, France

  2. Filippi R, Schwarz M, Voth D, Reisch R, Grunert P, Perneczky A (2001) Bovine pericardium for duraplasty: clinical results in 32 patients. Neurosurg Rev 24(2–3):103–107

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Baharuddin A, Go BT, Firdaus MN, Abdullah J (2002) Bovine pericardium for dural graft: clinical results in 22 patients. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 104(4):342–344

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gupta M, Lyon F, Singh AD, Rundle PA, Rennie IG (2007) Bovine pericardium (Tutopatch) wrap for hydroxyapatite implants. Eye 21:476–479

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Eavey RD (1998) Inlay tympanoplasty: cartilage butterfly technique. Laryngoscope 108(5):657–661

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mauri M, Neto JF, Fuchs SD (2001) Evaluation of inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Laryngoscope 111:1479–1485

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fiorino F, Barbieri F (2007) Fat graft myringoplasty after unsuccessful tympanic membrane repair. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264(10):1125–1128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Thomassin JM, Facon F, Gabert K (2004) The effectiveness of otoendoscopy in myringoplasty using adipose graft. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 121(6):346–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Saadat D, Ng M, Vadapalli S, Sinsha UK (2001) Office myringoplasty with Alloderm. Laryngoscope 111:181–183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gérard JM, Thill MP, Gersdorff M (2003) The art of the tympanoplasty and its clinical illustration. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 120(2):83–93

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Albera R, Dagna F, Lacilla M, Canale A (2009) Equine versus bovine pericardium in transmeatal underlay myringoplasty. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 104(4):287–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gérard JM, Gersdorff M (2006) The Tutopatch graft for transcanal myringoplasty. B-ENT 2(4):177–179

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yetiser S, Tosun F, Satar B (2001) Revision myringoplasty with solvent-dehydrated human dura mater (Tutoplast). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 124(5):518–521

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Haid CT (1993) Clinical experiences with dehydrated temporalis fascia in tympanoplasty. Early and late results. HNO 41(4):185–191

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sarac S, Gursel B (2002) Use of homograft dehydrated temporal fascia in tympanoplasty. Otol Neurotol 23(4):416–421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None of the authors or any relatives have any financial interest in Tutogen Medical, Inc., Alachua, FL, USA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Marc Gérard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Dorlodot, C., De Bie, G., Deggouj, N. et al. Are bovine pericardium underlay xenograft and butterfly inlay autograft efficient for transcanal tympanoplasty?. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 272, 327–331 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2855-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2855-8

Keywords

Navigation