Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type 1 Tympanoplasty (Myringoplasty) in a Rural Tertiary Care Hospital in India: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Abstract

Background Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) is described as middle ear cleft inflammation that results in long-term alterations to the tympanic membrane and/or the middle ear structures.In cases of CSOM, type 1 tympanoplasty, also known as myringoplasty, is a successful procedure for repairing the tympanic membrane and can even help restore hearing loss. This study aims to compare functional and clinical outcomes of type 1 tympanoplasty performed using transcanal endoscopic ear surgery (TEES) versus those performed via microscopic ear surgery (MES) for perforation in the tympanic membrane in the safe type of CSOM. Methodology Between January 2018 and January 2022, a retrospective analysis of 100 patients (47 men and 53 women) operated for the safe type of CSOM with a perforated tympanic membrane was conducted in our department. Based on the surgical methods, cases were randomly divided into two groups. There were 50 people in group 1 who underwent endoscopic tympanoplasty and 50 in group 2 who underwent microscopic tympanoplasty. The following factors were assessed: patient demographics; tympanic membrane perforation size at the time of surgery; operating room time; hearing outcomes, that is, closure of air-bone gap (ABG); graft uptake success rate; postoperative hospital stay; and medical resource usage.Patients were followed up for 12 weeks. Results Both groups shared similar epidemiological profiles, preoperative hearing status, and perforation sizes. In both groups, the rate ofgraft uptake was comparable. The average ABG closure was also quite comparable. In the case of endoscopic surgeries, the mean operative time was shorter; which was statistically significant, and complications were significantly lower in group 1. Conclusions Compared to its microscopic counterpart, endoscopic tympanoplasty has a similar graft uptake success rate and a comparable hearing outcome; however, it requires less operative time and hospital stay, has early recovery, and makes lesser use of medical resources, and it is cosmetically better.