Impact of type of graft material on outcome of tympanoplasty: a comparison between temporalis fascia and cartilage with perichondrium
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2454-5929.ijohns20183706Keywords:
Cartilage-perichondrium graft, Temporalis fascia graft, Type I tympanoplastyAbstract
Background: Various graft materials have been used to repair tympanic membrane perforations. Temporalis fascia and cartilage with or without perichondrium are the most commonly used materials. The objective of the study was to compare the anatomical and functional success in type I tympanoplasty by using cartilage- perichondrium graft with that of temporalis fascia in a homogenous group of population.
Methods: 64 patients with chronic otitis media - mucosal type were included in the study. This prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary care centre between December 2012 to October 2014. Patients were grouped randomly between temporalis fascia (34/64) and cartilage group (30/64). In the fascia group, the graft was placed by underlay technique. In the cartilage group, tragal cartilage was thinned by cartilage thinner keeping the perichondrium attached on one side. The graft was placed by underlay or over-underlay technique. Postoperative results i.e. graft take up (anatomical success) and hearing improvement (functional success) were evaluated at 6 months.
Results: Graft take up rate was 94.11% for fascia group and 96.66% for cartilage group. The mean pure tone air bone gaps pre and postoperatively in the fascia group were 26.4±6.55 dB and 11.47±6.5 dB respectively, whereas for cartilage-perichondrium group, the values were 28.3±5.86 dB and 13.2±6.48 dB respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the graft take up rate and postoperative hearing improvement between the two groups (p≥0.05).
Conclusions: Cartilage with perichondrium can be considered as an alternative to more traditional grafting material for tympanic membrane reconstruction.
References
Zoellner F. The principles of plastic surgery of sound conducting apparatus. J Laryngol Otol, 1955;69:567-9.
Wullstein HL. Functional operations in the middle ear with split thickness skin graft. Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 1953;161:422-35.
Lee JC, Lee SR, Nam JK, Lee TH, Kwon JK. Comparison of different grafting techniques in Type I Tympanoplasty in cases of significant middle ear granulation. Otol Neurotol. 2012;33:586-90.
Buckingham RA. Fascia and perichondrium atrophy in tympanoplasty and recurrent middle ear atelectasis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1992;101:755–8.
Yung M, Vivekanandan S, Smith P. Randomized study comparing fascia and cartilage grafts in myringoplasty. Annals Otology, Rhinology Laryngol. 2011;120(8):535-41.
Kutecha B, Fowler S, Topham J. Myringoplasty- A prospective audit study. Clinical Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1990;24:126-9.
Glasscock ME, Shambaugh GE. Pathology and clinical course of inflammatory diseases of middle ear-surgery of the ear. 5th Edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2006: 28-29.
Yegin Y, Celik M, Arzu Karaman Koc. Comparison of temporalis fascia muscle and full thickness cartilage grafts in type I pediatric tympanoplasties. Brazilian J Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;82:605-701.
Maheshwari A, Panigrahi R, Mahajan S. Comparison of temporalis fascia with tragal cartilage- perichondrium (composite graft) as a grafting material in type I tympanoplasty: A prospective randomized study. International J Scientific Study. 2015;3:29-34.
Yung M. Cartilage tympanoplasty- Literature review. J Laryngol Otol. 2008;122:663-72.
Gerber MJ, Mason JC, Lambert PR. Hearing results after primary cartilage tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 2000;110:1994-9.
Overbosch HC. Homograft myringoplasty with microsliced septal cartilage. Proc Otolaryngol. 1971;33:356–7.
Abdelhameed W, Rezk I, Awad A. Impact of Cartilage graft size on success of tympanoplasty. Brazilian J Otolaryngol. 2017;83:507-11.
Lee CF, Chen JH, Chou YF, Hsu LP, Chen PR, Liu TC. Optimal graft thickness for different sizes of tympanic membrane perforation in cartilage tympanoplasty: A finite element analysis. Laryngoscope. 2007;117:725-30.
Zahnert T, Huttenbrink KB, Murbe D, Bornitz M. Experimental investigations of the use of cartilage in tympanic membrane reconstruction. Am J Otol. 2000;21:322–8.
Cabra J, Monux A. Efficacy of cartilage palisade tympanoplasty: randomized control trial. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:589-95.
Mauri M, Lubianca Neto JF, Fuchs SC, Evaluation of inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Laryngoscope. 2000;110:1994-9.
Gierek T, Slaska- Kaspera A, Majzel K, Klimczak- Golab L. Results of Myringoplasty and Type I tympanoplasty with the use of fascia, cartilage and perichondrium grafts. Otolaryngol Pol. 2004;58:529-33.
Khan MM, Parab SR. Comparative study of sliced tragal cartilage and temporalis fascia in type I tympanoplasty. J Laryngol Otol. 2015;129:16–22.
Vashishth A, Mathur NN, Choudhary SR, Bhardwaj A. Clinical advantages of cartilage palisades over temporalis fascia in type I tympanoplasty. Auris Nasus Larynx 2014;41:422–7.
Demirci S, Tuzuner A, Karadas H, Acikgoz C, Caylan R, Samim EE. Comparison of temporal muscle fascia and cartilage grafts in pediatric tympanoplasties. Am J Otolaryngol. 2014;35:796–9.
Onal K, Arslanoglu S, Songu M, Demiray U, Demirpehlivan I. Functional results of temporalis fascia versus cartilage tympanoplasty in patients with bilateral chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol. 2012;126:22-5.
