Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T18:07:50.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Authors' reply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2016

R Shankar ,
R S Virk ,
K Gupta ,
AK Gupta ,
A Bal  and
S Bansal
R Shankar
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head–Neck Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
R S Virk
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head–Neck Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
K Gupta
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head–Neck Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
AK Gupta
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head–Neck Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
A Bal
Affiliation:
Department of Histopathology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
S Bansal
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology and Head–Neck Surgery, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Letters to the Editors
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 130 , Issue 4 , April 2016 , pp. 412 - 413
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

1Shankar, R, Virk, RS, Gupta, K, Gupta, AK, Bal, A, Bansal, S.Evaluation and comparison of type I tympanoplasty efficacy and histopathological changes to the tympanic membrane in dry and wet ear: a prospective study. J Laryngol Otol 2015;129:945–9Google Scholar
2Kotecha, B, Fowler, S, Topham, J.Myringoplasty: a prospective audit study. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1999;24:126–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Lou, Z, Tang, Y, Xiao, J.The effect of ofloxacin otic drops on the regeneration of human traumatic tympanic membrane perforations. Clin Otolaryngol 2015. Epub 2015 Oct 14Google Scholar
4Lou, Z, Wang, Y, Su, K.Comparison of the healing mechanisms of human dry and endogenous wet traumatic eardrum perforations. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2014;271:2153–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Lou, ZC, Tang, YM, Yang, J.A prospective study evaluating spontaneous healing of aetiology, size and type-different groups of traumatic tympanic membrane perforation. Clin Otolaryngol 2011;36:450–60CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Ozturk, K, Yaman, H, Cihat Avunduk, M, Arbag, H, Keles, B, Uyar, Y.Effectiveness of MeroGel hyaluronic acid on tympanic membrane perforations. Acta Otolaryngol 2006;126:1158–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Caylan, R, Titiz, A, Falcioni, M, De Donato, G, Russo, A, Taibah, A et al. Myringoplasty in children: factors influencing surgical outcome. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998;118:709–13Google Scholar