Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:18:27.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative study of the underlay and overlay techniques of myringoplasty in large and subtotal perforations of the tympanic membrane

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2006

Mangal Singh ,
Ashutosh Rai ,
Sarmishtha Bandyopadhyay  and
S. C. Gupta
Mangal Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad, India.
Ashutosh Rai
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery Nazreth Hospital, Allahabad, India.
Sarmishtha Bandyopadhyay
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad, India.
S. C. Gupta
Affiliation:
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad, India.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Myringoplasty is an established procedure. However, the quest is on to improve the results further by studying the different influencing factors, that could possibly affect the outcome. In the present randomized prospective study of one year’s duration, 60 patients having dry, large and subtotal perforations of the tympanic membrane were subjected to myringoplasty, 30 by the overlay technique and 30 by the underlay technique keeping all other influencing factors constant. The graft take-up rate was found to be the same (93.3 per cent) in both techniques but the underlay technique was judged to be better because of its technical ease, better assessment of ossicular chain integrity and mobility, less time consumption (55 minutes vs 90 minutes), earlier healing of graft (four to six weeks vs six to eight weeks), hearing gain in more patients (92.8 per cent vs 57.1 per cent) and fewer minor complications (6.6 per cent vs 33.3 per cent).

Keywords

MyringoplastySurgical Procedures OperativeTreatment Outcome
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 117 , Issue 6 , June 2003 , pp. 444 - 448
Copyright
© Royal Society of Medicine Press Limited 2003

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.)