We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of the underlay and over-underlay tympanoplasty: A randomized, double-blind controlled trial.
Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology 2023 April
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the graft success rate and hearing outcomes in patients with large tympanic membrane (TM) perforation in underlay and over-underlay approaches.
METHODS: This is a prospective double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial with a parallel design. Patients aged 15-75 years old with large TM perforation (more than 50% of TM) who operated at Khalili hospital affiliated with Shiraz University of Medical Science, Iran, were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were recent otorrhea, revision surgery, and pathologic intraoperative findings such as the presence of cholesteatoma, cholesterol granuloma, ear canal polyp, or damaged ossicle. In the first group, the underlay method and in the second group over-underlay method were performed. Graft success rate, atelectasis, and audiology outcomes were evaluated after 6 months.
RESULTS: The investigation was conducted on 84 patients in the underlay and 67 patients in the over-underlay group. Although there was a higher rate of graft failure (9%) in the over-underlay group in comparison with the underlay group (4.8%), the difference was not statistically significant ( p -value = .34). No atelectasis was seen in both group. Although, between-groups comparison of the preoperative and postoperative speech reception thresholds (SRT) and air-bone gaps (ABG) values showed statistically significantly lower SRT and ABG in the over-underlay technique, the difference was clinically negligible.
CONCLUSION: Both techniques provide the same graft success rate, but SRT and ABG were significantly lower in the over-underlay technique after the operation.
LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 1b.
METHODS: This is a prospective double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial with a parallel design. Patients aged 15-75 years old with large TM perforation (more than 50% of TM) who operated at Khalili hospital affiliated with Shiraz University of Medical Science, Iran, were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were recent otorrhea, revision surgery, and pathologic intraoperative findings such as the presence of cholesteatoma, cholesterol granuloma, ear canal polyp, or damaged ossicle. In the first group, the underlay method and in the second group over-underlay method were performed. Graft success rate, atelectasis, and audiology outcomes were evaluated after 6 months.
RESULTS: The investigation was conducted on 84 patients in the underlay and 67 patients in the over-underlay group. Although there was a higher rate of graft failure (9%) in the over-underlay group in comparison with the underlay group (4.8%), the difference was not statistically significant ( p -value = .34). No atelectasis was seen in both group. Although, between-groups comparison of the preoperative and postoperative speech reception thresholds (SRT) and air-bone gaps (ABG) values showed statistically significantly lower SRT and ABG in the over-underlay technique, the difference was clinically negligible.
CONCLUSION: Both techniques provide the same graft success rate, but SRT and ABG were significantly lower in the over-underlay technique after the operation.
LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: 1b.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app