A Prospective Randomised Comparative Study Between Cartilage and Fascia Tympanoplasty in a Tertiary Care Hospital to Look for Better Alternative in High Risk Cases.

Abstract

CSOM patients are most commonly managed surgically by type I tympanoplasty using either cartilage shield technique or underlay grafting technique. In our study, we have compared the graft uptake and hearing results of type I tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia and cartilage shield, and also reviewed the literature regarding the results of these two methods. 160 patients aged between 15 and 60 years were randomized into two groups of 80 patients each, with odd numbers subjected to conchal or tragal cartilage shield grafting in group I, while in group II with even numbers, the patients underwent temporalis fascia grafting by underlay technique. Three months post-surgery, the graft uptake was seen in 76 patients (95%) in the cartilage shield group as compared to 58 patients (72.5%) in the temporalis fascia group, which was statistically significant between the two groups [Fisher's exact value = 0.000]. The uptake rate was much higher in cartilage shield graft as compared to fascia graft even in complicated cases like revision tympanoplasty (TP), discharging ear, subtotal perforation and retracted/adhered TP. Also, the hearing improvement in fascia and cartilage shield group was not statistically significant comparing pre- and post-operative patients, indicating that there was not much difference in audiological outcomes between the two groups. We advocate the use of cartilage shield graft as a substitute for fascia graft in all feasible cases as well as in complicated situations to improve the success rate of type I tympanoplasty, without compromising on the hearing improvement, as seen in our study. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-022-03175-1.