Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative Study of Outcome of Endoscopic Myringoplasty in Active and Inactive Mucosal Chronic Otitis Media Patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare graft uptake and hearing improvement in active and inactive mucosal chronic otitis media patients after endoscopic myringoplasty. This is prospective study conducted at a government medical college and hospital from February 2014 to August 2015. A total of 40 active (wet) ears with mucoid discharge and 40 inactive (dry) ears (at least 6 weeks dry before surgery) with mucosal chronic otitis media were operated on by endoscopic myringoplasty by transcanal approach. Graft uptake and hearing gain rates 3 months after surgery were compared for both groups. Endoscopic myringoplasty using temporal fascia graft via transcanal approach was used. The graft take rate was 77.5% for the active ear group and 85% for the inactive ear group. The hearing gain rate was 82.5% for the inactive ear group and 72.5% for the active ear group. Differences were found to be statistically insignificant for both graft uptake and hearing gain. The success of endoscopic myringoplasty is not adversely affected by the presence of mucoid ear discharge at the time of surgery, and outcomes are comparable to those of the operation done for inactive ear.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gulya AJ (2010) Pathology and clinical course of the inflammatory diseases of the middle ear. Glasscock–Shambaugh surgery of the ear, 6th edn. People’s Medical House, Shelton, pp 427–428

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rourke T, Snelling JD, Aldren C (2010) Cartilage graft butterfly myringoplasty: how we do it. Clin Otolaryngol 35:135–138

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berthold E (1878) Ueber myringoplastik. Wier Med Bull 1:627

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wullstein H (1956) Theory and practice of myringoplasty. Laryngoscope 66:1076–1093

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zollner F (1955) The principles of plastic surgery of the sound-conducting apparatus. J Laryngol Otol 69:637–652

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Harugop AS, Mudhol RS, Godhi RA (2008) A comparative study of endoscope assisted myringoplasty and micrsoscope assisted myringoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 60:298–302

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Thomassin JM, Duchon-Doris JM, Emram B, Rud C, Conciatori J, Vilcoq P (1990) Endoscopic ear surgery. Initial evaluation. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 107:564–570

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. El-Guindy A (1992) Endoscopic transcanal myringoplasty. J Laryngol Otol 106:493–495

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vartiainen E, Nuutinen J (1993) Success and pitfalls in myringoplasty: follow-up study of 404 cases. Am J Otol 14(3):301–305

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Westerberg J, Harder H, Magnuson B, Westerberg L, Hyden D (2011) Ten year myringoplasty series: does the cause of perforation affect the success rate? J Laryngol Otol 125:126–132

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mills R, Thiel G, Mills N (2013) Results of myringoplasty operations in active and inactive ears in adults. Laryngoscope 123:2245–2249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Umapathy N, Dekker PJ (2003) Myringoplasty: is it worth performing in children? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 129:1053–1055

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Vrabec JT, Deskin RW, Grady JJ (1999) Meta-analysis of pediatric tympanoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 125:530–534

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nagle SK, Jagade MV, Gandhi SR, Pawar PV (2009) Comparative study of outcome of type I tympanoplasty in dry and wet ear. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 61:138–140

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Gersdorff M, Garin P, Decat M (1995) Myringoplasty: long term results in adults and children. Am J Otol 16:532–535

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Noh H, Lee DH (2012) Vascularisation of myringo-tympanoplastic grafts in active and inactive chronic mucosal otitis media: a prospective cohort study. Clin Otolaryngol 37:355–361

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Rahman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights Statement

All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tasleem, M., Rahman, A. & Aslam, M. Comparative Study of Outcome of Endoscopic Myringoplasty in Active and Inactive Mucosal Chronic Otitis Media Patients. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 69, 319–322 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-017-1121-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-017-1121-6

Keywords

Navigation