Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:57:58.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Paediatric tympanoplasty: comparative study between patients aged 5–8 years and those aged over 14 years

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2016

G B Singh*
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals, New Delhi, India
R Arora
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals, New Delhi, India
S Garg
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Baba Saheb Ambedkar Medical College and Hospital, New Delhi, India
S Kumar
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Lady Hardinge Medical College and Associated Hospitals, New Delhi, India
D Kumar
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Employees' State Insurance Hospital, New Delhi, India
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Gautam Bir Singh, House no. 1433, Sector 15, Faridabad-121007 (National Capital Region), Haryana, India E-mail: gbsnit@yahoo.co.in

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate and analyse the success rate of tympanoplasty type I in paediatric patients aged 5 to 8 years compared to a control group (patients aged over 14 years).

Methods:

In this prospective study, 60 patients (of either sex) with chronic suppurative otitis media inactive mucosal disease were divided into 2 groups (30 in each): group A comprised paediatric patients aged 5–8 years and group B consisted of older individuals aged over 14 years. All patients underwent tympanoplasty type I with an underlay technique using a temporalis fascia graft.

Results:

Impressive surgical success rates of 87 and 90 per cent were recorded in groups A and B, respectively. Furthermore, audiological success rates of 69 and 78 per cent were achieved in groups A and B respectively. Statistical analysis of the data revealed that eustachian tube function had no impact on the outcome of tympanoplasty.

Conclusion:

Tympanoplasty type I performed in children aged five to eight years gives comparable results to those of older individuals.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2016 

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.)

References

1Umapathy, N, Dekker, PJ. Myringoplasty: is it worth performing in children? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:1053–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Singh, GB, Sidhu, TS, Sharma, A, Singh, N. Tympanoplasty type I in children--an evaluative study. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2005;69:1071–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Knapik, M, Saliba, I. Pediatric myringoplasty: a study of factors affecting outcome. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2011;75:818–23Google Scholar
4Vrabec, JT, Deskin, RW, Grady, JJ. Meta-analysis of pediatric tympanoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;125:530–4Google Scholar
5Sarkar, S, Roychoudhury, A, Roychoudhury, BK. Tympanoplasty in children. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009;266:627–33Google Scholar
6Riberio, JC, Rui, C, Netercia, S, Jose, R, Antonio, P. Tympanoplasty in children: a review of 91 cases. Auris Nasus Larynx 2011;38:21–5Google Scholar
7Boronat-Echeverría, NE, Reyes-García, E, Sevilla-Delgado, Y, Aguirre-Mariscal, H, Mejía-Aranguré, JM. Prognostic factors of successful tympanoplasty in paediatric patients: a cohort study. BMC Pediatr 2012;12:67Google Scholar
8MacDonald, RR, Lusk, RP, Muntz, HR. Fasciaform myringoplasty in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;120:138–43Google Scholar
9Emir, H, Ceylan, K, Kizilkaya, Z, Gocmen, H, Uzunkulaoglu, H, Samim, E. Success is a matter of experience: type 1 tympanoplasty: influencing factors on type 1 tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2007;264:595–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation. Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;113:186–7Google Scholar
11Collins, WO, Telischi, FF, Balkany, TJ, Buchman, CA. Paediatric tympanoplasty: effect of contralateral ear status on outcomes. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:646–51Google Scholar
12Merenda, D, Koike, K, Shafiei, M, Ramadan, H. Tympanometric volume: a predictor of success of tympanoplasty in children. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007;136:189–92Google Scholar
13Megerian, CA. Pediatric tympanoplasty and the role of preoperative eustachian tube evaluation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;126:1039–41Google Scholar
14Bluestone, CD, Cantekin, EL, Douglas, GS. Eustachian tube function related to the results of tympanoplasty in children. Laryngoscope 1979;89:450–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Tos, M, Lau, T. Stability of tympanoplasty in children. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1989;22:1528Google Scholar
16Strong, MS. The eustachian tube: basic considerations. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1972;5:1927CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Kessler, A, Potsic, WP, Marsh, RR. Type 1 tympanoplasty in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;120:487–90Google Scholar
18Koch, WM, Friedman, EM, McGill, TJ, Healy, GB. Tympanoplasty in children. The Boston Children's Hospital experience. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1990;116:3540Google Scholar
19Pignataro, L, Grillo, Della Berta L, Cappacio, P, Zaghis, A. Myringoplasty in children: anatomical and functional results. J Laryngol Otol 2001;115:369–73Google Scholar
20Todd, NW. There are no accurate tests for eustachian tube function. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;126:1041–2Google Scholar
21François, M, Juvanon, JM, Contencin, P, Bobin, S, Manac'h, Y, Narcy, P. Myringoplasty in children [in French]. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac 1985;102:321–7Google Scholar
22Lau, T, Tos, M. Tympanoplasties in children: an analysis of late results. Am J Otol 1986;7:55–9Google Scholar
23Ophir, D, Porat, M, Marshak, G. Myringoplasty in the pediatric population. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1987;113:1288–90Google Scholar
24Gersdorff, M, Garin, P, Decat, M, Juantegui, M. Myringoplasty: long-term results in adults and children. Am J Otol 1995;16:532–5Google ScholarPubMed
25Albera, R, Ferrero, V, Lacilla, M, Canale, A. Tympanic reperforation in myringoplasty: evaluation of prognostic factors. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2006;115:875–9Google Scholar
26Yung, M, Neumann, C, Vowler, S. A longitudinal study on pediatric myringoplasty. Otol Neurotol 2007;28:353–5Google Scholar
27Black, JH, Hickey, SA, Wormald, PJ. An analysis of the results of myringoplasty in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1995;31:95100Google Scholar
28Shih, L, de Tar, T, Crabtree, JA. Myringoplasty in children. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1991;105:74–7Google Scholar
29Friedberg, J, Gillis, T. Tympanoplasty in childhood. J Otolaryngol 1980;9:165–8Google Scholar
30Raine, CH, Singh, SD. Tympanoplasty in children. A review of 114 cases. J Laryngol Otol 1983;9:217–21Google Scholar
31Uyar, Y, Keleş, B, Koç, S, Oztürk, K, Arbağ, H. Tympanoplasty in pediatric patients. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2006;70:1805–9Google Scholar
32Vartiainen, E. Results of surgical treatment for chronic noncholesteatomatous otitis media in the paediatric population. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1992;24:209–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33Sade, J, Ar, A. The eustachian tube. In: Ludman, H, Wright, T, eds. Diseases of the Ear. London: Hodder Arnold, 1997;337Google Scholar
34Manning, SC, Cantekin, EI, Kenna, MA, Bluestone, CD. Prognostic value of eustachian tube function in pediatric tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 1987;97:1012–16Google Scholar
35Browning, GG, Merchant, SN, Kelly, G, Swan, IR, Canter, R, McKerrow, WS. Chronic otitis media. In: Gleeson, M, ed. Scott Brown's Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (volume 3), 7th edn.London: Hodder Arnold, 2007;3435–6Google Scholar