A Study on Outcome of Myringoplasty in Dry Ear (Quiescent/Inactive CSOM) Without Using Gelfoam in Middle Ear
- 16 Downloads
Myringoplasty is a common surgery done for patients with tympanic membrane perforation in our clinical practice. This study was done to know the outcome of myringoplasty done without using gelfoam as a scaffold material. Simultaneously other parameters influencing the outcome were analysed. In a total of 80 patients assessed over 25 months were divided into test and control group by quasi randomisation. All patients underwent endoscopic underlay myringoplasty. Control groups had gelfoam bed created with gelfoam, whereas the test group only middle ear air pocket created with a proper seal without using gelfoam. The study revealed that without using gelfoam and creating a good middle ear air pocket the results were comparable to the method of using middle ear gelfoam bed. Also few insights and understanding regarding the parameters we need to asses preoperatively were also observed. With comparable healing and hearing results without using gelfoam in the middle ear, the normal physiology is restored in the postoperative period much earlier. The result of the surgery also becomes evident in the second postoperative week when the use of gelfoam in the middle ear is avoided.
KeywordsTympanic membrane Perforation Gelfoam Myringoplasty
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
- 1.Glasscock & Shambaugh (2010) Textbook on surgery of the ear. Chapter 6:465–489Google Scholar
- 2.Fish U (1994) Tympanoplasty, mastoidectomy and stapes surgery. J Laryngol Otol 39:44–49Google Scholar
- 14.Takahashi H (2001) The middle ear: the role of ventilation in disease and surgery, 1st edn. Springer, pp 45–47Google Scholar