Tympanic Perforations in Children: When to Propose Surgical Closure?
Journal
Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology
ISSN: 1537-4505
Titre abrégé: Otol Neurotol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100961504
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Feb 2024
29 Feb 2024
Historique:
medline:
5
3
2024
pubmed:
5
3
2024
entrez:
4
3
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This study aims to analyze the impact of age and other prognostic factors on the success of myringoplasty. A retrospective case series. Pediatric ENT department of a tertiary academic center. Two hundred forty-one children (318 ears) aged 3 to 17 years with tympanic perforation. Myringoplasty performed between 2009 and 2019. The rate of tympanic closure, perforation recurrence, revision surgery, and audiometric gain were collected. The impact of age and anatomical and surgical factors was analyzed for each procedure. With a mean follow-up time of 1 year, the tympanic closure rate was 87.7%, the perforation recurrence rate was 18.6%, and 16.7% of ears required reoperation. The mean air-bone gap decreased from 21 dB preoperatively to 12 dB postoperatively (p < 0.0001). We did not find different anatomical and audiometric results for our three groups of patients classified according to age. Audiometric results were associated with the location of the perforation, intraoperative inflammation of the middle ear mucosa, and the surgical technique performed. Myringoplasty in children is associated with excellent anatomical and functional results, even in the youngest patients. It can be proposed whatever the child's age if the patients are well selected before giving the indication.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38437809
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000004148
pii: 00129492-990000000-00519
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
All authors declare no conflicts of interest. No funding source supported our work.
Références
Assurance Maladie. Actes techniques de la CCAM en 2020. Available at: https://assurance-maladie.ameli.fr/etudes-et-donnees/actes-techniques-ccam-2020. Accessed January 12, 2022.
Umapathy N, Dekker PJ. Myringoplasty: is it worth performing in children? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003;129:1053–5.
Phillips JS, Yung MW, Nunney I. Myringoplasty outcomes in the UK. J Laryngol Otol 2015;129:860–4.
Denoyelle F, Roger G, Chauvin P, Garabedian E-N. Myringoplasty in children: predictive factors of outcome. Laryngoscope 1999;109:47–51.
Rozendorn N, Wolf M, Yakirevich A, Shapira Y, Carmel E. Myringoplasty in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2016;90:245–50.
Knapik M, Saliba I. Pediatric myringoplasty: a study of factors affecting outcome. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2011;75:818–23.
Kumar S, Acharya A, Hadjihannas E, Panagamuwa C, McDermott AL. Pediatric myringoplasty: definition of “success” and factors affecting outcome. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:1417–20.
Ben Gamra O, Nacef I, Abid W, Hariga I, Mbarek C. Myringoplasty in children: our results. Egypt J Ear Nose Throat Allied Sci 2015;16:41–6.
Hardman J, Muzaffar J, Nankivell P, Coulson C. Tympanoplasty for chronic tympanic membrane perforation in children: systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2015;36:796–804.
Kessler A, Potsic WP, Marsh RR. Type 1 Tympanoplasty in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;120:487–90.
Manning SC, Cantekin EI, Kenna MA, Bluestone CD. Prognostic value of Eustachian tube function in pediatric tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 1987;97:1012–6.
Aggarwal R, Saeed SR, Green KJM. Myringoplasty. J Laryngol Otol 2006;120:429–32.
Mehta RP, Rosowski JJ, Voss SE, O'Neil E, Merchant SN. Determinants of hearing loss in perforations of the tympanic membrane. Otol Neurotol 2006;27:136–43.
Farinetti A, Farah C, Triglia J-M. Myringoplasty in children for tympanic membrane perforation: indications, techniques, results, pre- and post-operative care, and prognostic factors. Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep 2018;6:32–41.
Schilder AGM, Bhutta MF, Butler CC, et al. Eustachian tube dysfunction: consensus statement on definition, types, clinical presentation and diagnosis. Clin Otolaryngol 2015;40:407–11.
Hosny S, El-Anwar MW, Abd-Elhady M, Khazbak A, Feky A. Outcomes of myringoplasty in wet and dry ears. Int Adv Otol 2015;10:256–9.
Lee DY, Kim YH. Can fat-plug myringoplasty be a good alternative to formal myringoplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2018;39:403–9.
Eavey RD. Inlay tympanoplasty: cartilage butterfly technique. Laryngoscope 1998;108:657–61.
Riss JC, Roman S, Morredu E, et al. Butterfly-cartilage tympanoplasty in children: a 28-case series and literature review. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 2016;133:179–82.
Alain H, Esmat NH, Ohad H, Yona V, Nageris BI. Butterfly myringoplasty for total, subtotal, and annular perforations. Laryngoscope 2016;126:2565–8.
Ravi N, Meher R, Rathore PK, Singh I. Comparison of efficacy of endoscopic versus microscopic transcanal inlay butterfly cartilage myringoplasty. Am J Otolaryngol 2021;42:102978.