ENT Department, University Hospital of Larissa, Larisa, Greece.
Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Larissa, Larisa, Greece.
Laryngoscope. 2024 Aug;134(8):3466-3476. doi: 10.1002/lary.31365. Epub 2024 Feb 28.
Endoscopic ear surgery is no longer a promising technique, but a well-established one. This study aims to compare endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty based on current literature evidence, in terms of their efficacy and safety characteristics.
We conducted a systematic literature search of four medical databases (Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov), focusing on randomized controlled or observational studies comparing microscopic to endoscopic tympanoplasty.
Data related to the efficacy and safety of each technique were extracted. Outcome data were summarized using pooled mean differences or pooled odds ratio along with their 95% confidence intervals. The risk of bias was estimated, by using the ROBINS-I and RoB-II assessment tools, while the overall quality of evidence was evaluated according to the GRADE working group.
Thirty-three studies, with 2646 patients in total, were included in the meta-analysis. Success rate was evaluated by estimating tympanic graft failure (pooled mean difference:-0.23; 95% CI: -0.61, 0.14, I = 33.42%), and air-bone gap improvement (pooled mean difference:-0.05; 95% CI:-0.23, 0.13, I = 52.69%), resulting in comparable outcomes for the two techniques. A statistically significant difference favoring the endoscopic technique was detected regarding postoperative wound infection (OR: -1.72; 95% CI: -3.39, -0.04, I = 0%), dysgeusia (OR: -1.47; 95% CI: -2.47, -0.47, I = 0%), otitis externa development (OR: -1.96; 95% CI: -3.23, -0.69, I = 0%), auricular numbness (OR: -2.56; 95% CI: -3.93, -1.19, I = 0%), as well as surgical duration (OR: -1.86; 95% CI: -2.70, -1.02, I = 43.95%), when compared to the postauricular microscopic approach.
Endoscopic tympanoplasty is an innovative alternative to the microscopic technique, resulting in commensurate outcomes regarding success rate. Furthermore, it offers superior results concerning postoperative complications, while it presents a significant reduction in the duration of surgery, mainly when it is compared to the postauricular microscopic approach.
NA Laryngoscope, 134:3466-3476, 2024.
内镜耳科手术不再是一种有前途的技术,而是一种成熟的技术。本研究旨在根据现有文献证据,比较内镜和显微镜鼓室成形术在疗效和安全性方面的特点。
我们对四个医学数据库(Pubmed、Cochrane Library、Scopus、ClinicalTrials.gov)进行了系统的文献检索,重点是比较显微镜和内镜鼓室成形术的随机对照或观察性研究。
提取每种技术的疗效和安全性相关数据。使用汇总均数差或汇总优势比及其 95%置信区间总结结局数据。使用 ROBINS-I 和 RoB-II 评估工具评估偏倚风险,同时根据 GRADE 工作组评估证据的总体质量。
共纳入 33 项研究,总计 2646 例患者。通过估计鼓膜移植物失败(汇总均数差:-0.23;95%CI:-0.61,0.14,I=33.42%)和听力气骨导差改善(汇总均数差:-0.05;95%CI:-0.23,0.13,I=52.69%)评估手术成功率,两种技术的结果相当。内镜技术术后伤口感染(OR:-1.72;95%CI:-3.39,-0.04,I=0%)、味觉障碍(OR:-1.47;95%CI:-2.47,-0.47,I=0%)、外耳道炎发展(OR:-1.96;95%CI:-3.23,-0.69,I=0%)、耳麻(OR:-2.56;95%CI:-3.93,-1.19,I=0%)、手术时间(OR:-1.86;95%CI:-2.70,-1.02,I=43.95%)方面的优势具有统计学意义,与耳后显微镜入路相比。
与显微镜技术相比,内镜鼓室成形术是一种创新的替代方法,在手术成功率方面具有相同的效果。此外,它在术后并发症方面表现出更好的结果,同时手术时间显著缩短,尤其是与耳后显微镜入路相比。
无。Laryngoscope, 134:3466-3476, 2024.