Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T13:41:36.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of subcutaneous soft tissue versus temporalis fascia as a tympanoplasty graft material: a retrospective cohort study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2023

Mohammad Faramarzi Open the ORCID record for Mohammad Faramarzi [Opens in a new window] ,
Ali Faramarzi Open the ORCID record for Ali Faramarzi [Opens in a new window] ,
Sareh Roosta Open the ORCID record for Sareh Roosta [Opens in a new window] ,
Nadia Abbasi  and
Ahmad Monabati Open the ORCID record for Ahmad Monabati [Opens in a new window]
Mohammad Faramarzi
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Research Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Ali Faramarzi*
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Research Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran Student Research Committee, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Sareh Roosta
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Research Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Nadia Abbasi
Affiliation:
Otolaryngology Research Center, Department of Otolaryngology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Ahmad Monabati
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
*
Corresponding author: Ali Faramarzi; Email: ali_faramarzi@sums.ac.ir
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

This research compares the efficacy of subcutaneous soft tissue and temporalis fascia in tympanic membrane grafting for large tympanic membrane perforations.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study compared tympanic membrane graft success rate and hearing outcomes in 248 patients who underwent tympanoplasty using subcutaneous soft tissue (n = 118) or temporalis fascia (n = 130) via the post-auricular approach.

Results

Comparable results were observed in both groups. Tympanic membrane graft success rate was 98.3 per cent (116 ears) in the subcutaneous soft tissue group and 98.5 per cent (128 ears) in the temporalis fascia group. The rate of air–bone gap closure within 20 dB was 54.2 per cent (64 ears) and 60.0 per cent (78 ears) in the soft tissue and temporalis fascia groups, respectively (p = 0.360).

Conclusion

Subcutaneous soft tissue is a reliable and readily available tympanic membrane graft material in both revision and primary tympanoplasty for large tympanic membrane perforations.

Keywords

Tympanoplastysubcutaneous tissuefasciacicatrixtympanic membrane
Type
Main Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 138 , Issue 2 , February 2024 , pp. 153 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

These authors contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

Ali Faramarzi takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Bayram, A, Bayar Muluk, N, Cingi, C, Bafaqeeh, SA. Success rates for various graft materials in tympanoplasty – a review. J Otol 2020;15:107–1110.1016/j.joto.2020.01.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sale, CS. Myringoplasty with subcutaneous tissue graft. Arch Otolaryngol 1969;89:494–810.1001/archotol.1969.00770020496010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De, S, Karkanevatos, A, Srinivasan, VR, Roland, NJ, Lesser, TH. Myringoplasty using a subcutaneous soft tissue graft. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2004;29:314–1710.1111/j.1365-2273.2004.00820.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, CY, Gray, LC. Pressed scar tissue for tympanic membrane grafting in revision tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005;132:30–610.1016/j.otohns.2004.09.086CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Djalilian, HR. Revision tympanoplasty using scar tissue graft. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:131–510.1097/01.mao.0000190462.50755.f2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gurgel, RK, Jackler, RK, Dobie, RA, Popelka, GR. A new standardized format for reporting hearing outcome in clinical trials. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;147:803–710.1177/0194599812458401CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gurgel, RK, Popelka, GR, Oghalai, JS, Blevins, NH, Chang, KW, Jackler, RK. Is it valid to calculate the 3-kilohertz threshold by averaging 2 and 4 kilohertz? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;147:102–410.1177/0194599812437156CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheehy, JL, Anderson, RG. Myringoplasty. A review of 472 cases. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1980;89:331–410.1177/000348948008900407CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polanik, MD, Trakimas, DR, Black, NL, Cheng, JT, Kozin, ED, Remenschneider, AK. High-frequency conductive hearing following total drum replacement tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020;162:914–2110.1177/0194599820907600CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, KN, Tam, M, Blevins, NH, Puria, S. Tympanic membrane collagen fibers: a key to high-frequency sound conduction. Laryngoscope 2008;118:483–9010.1097/MLG.0b013e31815b0d9fCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knutsson, J, Bagger-Sjöbäck, D, von Unge, M. Collagen type distribution in the healthy human tympanic membrane. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:1225–910.1097/MAO.0b013e3181c0e621CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fay, J, Puria, S, Decraemer, WF, Steele, C. Three approaches for estimating the elastic modulus of the tympanic membrane. J Biomech 2005;38:1807–1510.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.08.022CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chhapola, S, Matta, I. Cartilage–perichondrium: an ideal graft material? Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;64:208–1310.1007/s12070-011-0306-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, KN, Cai, H, Puria, S. The effects of varying tympanic-membrane material properties on human middle-ear sound transmission in a three-dimensional finite-element model. J Acoust Soc Am 2017;142:2836–5310.1121/1.5008741CrossRefGoogle Scholar