0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Comparing Myringoplasty to Type I Tympanoplasty in Tympanic Membrane Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To compare the anatomic success rates of type I tympanoplasty (tympanoplasty) versus myringoplasty. By our definition, tympanoplasty involves entering the middle ear via elevation of a tympanomeatal flap, while myringoplasty involves surgery to the drumhead without middle ear exposure.

          Data Sources

          PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane.

          Review Methods

          To be included, studies must have documented surgical technique, tympanic membrane (TM) perforation size (as % of TM), and success rate using tissue or alloplastic grafts. Exclusion criteria included series with more than 10% of patients with cholesteatoma or middle ear pathology. A meta‐analysis of weighted summary proportions under the random effects model was performed, and proportion differences (PD) were calculated. A secondary analysis of hearing outcomes was performed.

          Results

          Eighty‐five studies met inclusion, with a tympanoplasty cohort of n = 7966 and n = 1759 for myringoplasty. For perforations, less than 50% of the TM, the success rate for tympanoplasty and myringoplasty was 90.2% and 91.4%, respectively (PD: 1.2%, p = .19). In perforations greater than 50%, tympanoplasty and myringoplasty success rates were 82.8% and 85.3%, respectively (PD: 2.5%, p = .29). For both procedures, perforations less than 50% of the TM had higher success rates than perforations greater than 50% of the TM ( p < .01). Both techniques endorsed significant improvements to air‐bone gap (ABG) metrics.

          Conclusion

          Our analysis suggests that the anatomic success rate is similar for tympanoplasty and myringoplasty, regardless of perforation size, and that smaller perforations experience higher success rates in both techniques. ABG outcomes were also similar between procedure techniques.

          Related collections

          Most cited references106

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

          Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

              David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
                Otolaryngol.--head neck surg.
                Wiley
                0194-5998
                1097-6817
                May 2023
                February 08 2023
                May 2023
                : 168
                : 5
                : 922-934
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Otolaryngology‐Head and Neck Surgery Medical University of South Carolina Charleston South Carolina USA
                Article
                10.1002/ohn.191
                36939595
                10d69cee-ff8b-4c76-833d-f27321cb7e0d
                © 2023

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article