Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and Communication Enhancement Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, ROC.
School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan, ROC.
J Chin Med Assoc. 2022 Oct 1;85(10):1017-1023. doi: 10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000777. Epub 2022 Jul 12.
Endoscopic transcanal transtympanic myringoplasty (ETTM) is a relatively easier technique than endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty (ETT) for repairing tympanic membrane perforations. No studies have compared the outcomes of these two procedures with tragal perichondrium after 1-year. Furthermore, there is no evidence-based stratification according to variations in perforation size in endoscopic ear surgery. Therefore, we compared the 1-year outcomes of ETTM and ETT stratified according to perforation size.
Patients who underwent ETT and ETTM to repair eardrum perforations with a tragal perichondrium graft were identified. Pure-tone audiometric tests and otoscopic examination were performed to assess hearing outcomes and perforation sizes both preoperatively and at least 1 year postoperatively.
In total, 158 patients (159 ears) were included. ETT was performed on 83 ears, and ETTM was performed on 76 ears. The ETTM procedure time was 10-minutes shorter than that for ETT ( p < 0.001). Perforation size was significantly correlated with graft take-rate. For large perforations, the ETT success rate was significantly higher than that of ETTM (91.7% vs. 78.9%). Success rates for small-medium perforations were comparable for both methods ( p > 0.05). However, for medium perforations, the graft take-rate of ETT reached a plateau after 6 months, while that of ETTM gradually declined during the 12-month follow-up. Both groups had a comparable mean postoperative air-bone gap gain ( p = 0.666).
ETTM is suitable for repairing small perforations, whereas ETT is preferred for large perforations. Both methods, and particularly ETTM, should be employed cautiously for medium perforations.
相较于内镜经耳道鼓室成形术(ETT),内镜经耳道鼓膜成形术(ETTM)修复鼓膜穿孔的技术难度相对较低。目前尚无研究比较这两种术式在 1 年后采用耳屏软骨膜的疗效。此外,在耳内镜手术中,针对穿孔大小的变化,尚无基于循证医学的分层策略。因此,我们比较了根据穿孔大小分层的 ETTM 和 ETT 的 1 年疗效。
本研究纳入了采用耳屏软骨膜移植修复鼓膜穿孔的行 ETT 和 ETTM 的患者。所有患者均行纯音测听和耳内镜检查,以评估术前和术后至少 1 年的听力和穿孔大小。
共纳入 158 例(159 耳)患者。其中 ETT 组 83 耳,ETTM 组 76 耳。与 ETT 相比,ETTM 手术时间缩短了 10 分钟(p<0.001)。穿孔大小与移植物成活率显著相关。对于大穿孔,ETT 的成功率显著高于 ETTM(91.7% vs. 78.9%)。小-中穿孔两种方法的成功率相当(p>0.05)。然而,对于中穿孔,ETT 的移植物成活率在 6 个月后达到平台期,而 ETTM 在 12 个月的随访期间逐渐下降。两组术后气骨导差的平均增益相当(p=0.666)。
ETTM 适用于修复小穿孔,而 ETT 则更适合修复大穿孔。两种方法,尤其是 ETTM,对于中穿孔应谨慎采用。