ArticleJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2022
Endoscopic transcanal transtympanic myringoplasty vs. endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty: 1-year follow-up study.
Article in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic tympanoplasty using small intestinal submucosa xenografts for large tympanic membrane perforations: a one-year retrospective cohort study with clinical follow-up.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
- Organ- or function-preservation surgery is recommended, but who is a candidate?Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic transcanal transtympanic myringoplasty (ETTM) is a relatively easier technique than endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty (ETT) for repairing tympanic membrane perforations. No studies have compared the outcomes of these two procedures with tragal perichondrium after 1-year. Furthermore, there is no evidence-based stratification according to variations in perforation size in endoscopic ear surgery. Therefore, we compared the 1-year outcomes of ETTM and ETT stratified according to perforation size.
methodsPatients who underwent ETT and ETTM to repair eardrum perforations with a tragal perichondrium graft were identified. Pure-tone audiometric tests and otoscopic examination were performed to assess hearing outcomes and perforation sizes both preoperatively and at least 1 year postoperatively.
resultsIn total, 158 patients (159 ears) were included. ETT was performed on 83 ears, and ETTM was performed on 76 ears. The ETTM procedure time was 10-minutes shorter than that for ETT ( p < 0.001). Perforation size was significantly correlated with graft take-rate. For large perforations, the ETT success rate was significantly higher than that of ETTM (91.7% vs. 78.9%). Success rates for small-medium perforations were comparable for both methods ( p > 0.05). However, for medium perforations, the graft take-rate of ETT reached a plateau after 6 months, while that of ETTM gradually declined during the 12-month follow-up. Both groups had a comparable mean postoperative air-bone gap gain ( p = 0.666).
conclusionETTM is suitable for repairing small perforations, whereas ETT is preferred for large perforations. Both methods, and particularly ETTM, should be employed cautiously for medium perforations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.