Risk stratification in endoscopic type I. tympanoplasty.
Air–bone gap
Endoscopic middle ear surgery
Middle ear risk index
Risk factors
Size of the perforation
Journal
European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
ISSN: 1434-4726
Titre abrégé: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9002937
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
26
10
2020
accepted:
05
01
2021
pubmed:
23
1
2021
medline:
3
11
2021
entrez:
22
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Several risk factors were studied in endoscopic type I. tympanoplasty, however, an easy-to-use risk stratification model is still missing. Retrospective chart review, focusing on individual risk factors and middle ear risk index (MERI). Patients who underwent endoscopic type I. tympanoplasty were included. Closed tympanic cavity was succesfully created in 88.1% of the 42 cases, the overall 21,5 dB air-bone gap (ABG) was reduced by 9,8 dB. The average MERI score of the patients was 2.1 ± 1.5. 78.6% of the patients were categorised into the mild, while 21.4% into the moderate risk group. The perforation was considered small in 81.0% of the cases, while large in 19.0%. The size of the perforation and the preoperative ABG, but not the MERI status were the only single predictors of success. Using a risk stratification model that is based on the size of the perforation, the preoperative ABG and MERI status, patients could be referred into two distinct groups of risk: the majority expecting excellent outcomes with maximum one risk factor present, and patients with deteriorated rate of success when having two or three risk factors. Endoscopic type I. tympanoplasty with underlay perichondrium graft can be performed with good chance of success. However, if more than one risk factors are present, the chance of residual perforation becomes great. In addition to the established risk factors, our results point out that despite its strong correlation with perforation size, ABG may have a predictive role.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33481078
doi: 10.1007/s00405-021-06606-x
pii: 10.1007/s00405-021-06606-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4757-4766Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature.
Références
Jolink C, Zwemstra MR, de Wolf MJF et al (2018) Success rate of tympanic membrane closure in the elderly compared to younger adults. Otol Neurotol 39:34–38
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001649
Çayir S, Kayabaşi S (2019) Type 1 tympanoplasty in pediatric patients: comparison of fascia and perichondrium grafts. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 121:95–98
doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2019.03.007
Phillips JS, Yung MW, Nunney I (2015) Myringoplasty outcomes in the UK. J Laryngol Otol 129:860–864
doi: 10.1017/S002221511500198X
Özdamar K, Sen A (2019) Comparison of the anatomical and functional success of fascia and perichondrium grafts in transcanal endoscopic type 1 tympanoplasty. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 48:67
doi: 10.1186/s40463-019-0386-z
Lade H, Choudhary SR, Vashishth A (2014) Endoscopic vs microscopic myringoplasty: a different perspective. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 271(7):1897–1902
doi: 10.1007/s00405-013-2673-z
Dursun E, Terzi S, Demir E et al (2020) The evaluation of prognostic factors in endoscopic cartilage tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol (online ahead of print)
Onal K, Uguz MZ, Kazikdas KC et al (2005) A multivariate analysis of otological, surgical and patient-related factors in determining success in myringoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol. 30(2):115–120
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2273.2004.00947.x
Tan HE, Santa Maria PL, Eikelboom RH et al (2016) Type I tympanoplasty meta-analysis: a single variable analysis. Otol Neurotol 37:838–846
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001099
Onofre R, Ha SC, Yang CJ et al (2018) Prognostic roles of preoperative CT findings and air-bone gaps in type 1 tympanoplasty. Acta Otolaryngol 138:795–800
doi: 10.1080/00016489.2018.1478129
Salviz M, Bayram O, Bayram AA et al (2015) Prognostic factors in type I tympanoplasty. Auris Nasus Larynx 42:20–23
doi: 10.1016/j.anl.2014.08.010
Li R, Wu N, Zhang J et al (2020) Analysis on the correlation between Eustachian tube function and outcomes of type I tympanoplasty for chronic suppurative otitis media. Acta Otolaryngol 140:664–667
pubmed: 32400245
Visvanathan V, Vallamkondu V, Bhimrao SK (2018) What effect does smoking have on the surgical closure of tympanic membrane perforations? A review. Otol Neurotol 39:1217–1221
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002011
Kartush JM (1994) Ossicular chain reconstruction: capitulum to malleus. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 27:689–715
doi: 10.1016/S0030-6665(20)30641-1
Becvarovski Z, Kartush JM (2001) Smoking and tympanoplast implications for prognosis and the middle ear risk index MERI. Laryngoscope 111:1806–1811
doi: 10.1097/00005537-200110000-00026
Pinar E, Sadullahoglu K, Calli C et al (2008) Evaluation of prognostic factors and middle ear risk index in tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 139:386–390
doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2008.05.623
Demir UL, Karaca S, Ozmen OA et al (2012) Is it the middle ear disease or the reconstruction material that determines the functional outcome in ossicular chain reconstruction? Otol Neurotol 33:580–585
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31824b774c
Shishegar M, Faramarzi M, Rashidi RM (2019) Evaluation of middle ear risk index in patients undergoing tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 276:2769–2774
doi: 10.1007/s00405-019-05539-w
Kotecha B, Fowler S, Topham J (1999) Myringoplasty: a prospective audit study. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 24:126–129
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.1999.00227.x
Lee P, Kelly G, Mills RP (2002) Myringoplasty: does the size of the perforation matter? Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 27:331–334
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00590.x
Plodpai Y (2018) Endoscopic vs microscopic overlay tympanoplasty for correcting large tympanic membrane perforations: a randomized clinical trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 159:879–886
doi: 10.1177/0194599818786948
Magliulo G, Iannella G (2018) Endoscopic versus microscopic approach in attic cholesteatoma surgery. Am J Otolaryngol 39:25–30
doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2017.10.003
Tseng CC, Lai MT, Wu CC et al (2017) Comparison of the efficacy of endoscopic tympanoplasty and microscopic tympanoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Laryngoscope 127:1890–1896
doi: 10.1002/lary.26379
Pap I, Tóth I, Gede N et al (2019) Endoscopic type I tympanoplasty is as effective as microscopic type I tympanoplasty but less invasive—A meta-analysis. Clin Otolaryngol 44:942–953
doi: 10.1111/coa.13407
(1995) Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 113:186–187
Schober P, Boer C, Schwarte LA (2018) Correlation coefficients: appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analg 126:1763–1768
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864
Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. In: Parzen E, Tanabe K, Kitagawa G (eds) Selected papers of Hirotugu akaike. Springer series in statistics (perspectives in statistics). Springer, New York
Austin PC, Steyerberg EW (2015) The number of subjects per variable required in linear regression analyses. J Clin Epidemiol 68:627–636
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.014
Hirji KF, Mehta CR, Patel NR (1987) Computing distributions for exact logistic regression. J Am Stat Assoc 82(400):1110–1117
doi: 10.1080/01621459.1987.10478547
Kent DT, Kitsko DJ, Wine T et al (2014) Frequency-specific hearing outcomes in pediatric type I tympanoplasty. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 140:106–111
doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2013.6082
Mehta RP, Rosowski JJ, Voss SE et al (2006) Determinants of hearing loss in perforations of the tympanic membrane. Otol Neurotol 27:136–143
doi: 10.1097/01.mao.0000176177.17636.53
Knapik M, Saliba I (2011) Pediatric myringoplasty: a study of factors affecting outcome. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 75:818–823
doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2011.03.015
Lerut B, Pfammatter A, Moons J et al (2012) Functional correlations of tympanic membrane perforation size. Otol Neurotol 33:379–386
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e318245cea5
Albu S, Babighian G, Trabalzini F (1998) Prognostic factors in tympanoplasty. Am J Otol 19:136–140
doi: 10.1016/S0196-0709(98)90111-9
Emir H, Ceylan K, Kizilkaya Z et al (2007) Success is a matter of experience: type 1 tympanoplasty: influencing factors on type 1 tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 264:595–599
doi: 10.1007/s00405-006-0240-6
Ismi O, Gorur K, Gur H et al (2020) Double-layered (cartilage island + extra perichondrium) graft for type 1 Tympanoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg (online ahead of print)
Vittinghoff E, McCulloch CE (2007) Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression. Am J Epidemiol 165:710–718
doi: 10.1093/aje/kwk052