ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Study of Endoscopic Transcanal Tympanoplasty and Tympanoplasty by Conventional Postaural Approach in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Central India.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Chronic otitis media (COM) often necessitates tympanoplasty to repair the tympanic membrane. While conventional postaural tympanoplasty (PA) is well-established, endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty (ET) is gaining traction for its minimally invasive benefits. This study aims to compare these two surgical techniques regarding their anatomical and functional outcomes and assess the role of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in improving these outcomes. Material and methods This prospective comparative study was conducted at Acharya Vinoba Bhave Rural Hospital, involving 60 patients with COM. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either ET or PA, with each group further subdivided based on PRP use. Preoperative evaluations included auditory function tests and diagnostic endoscopy. Postoperative assessments were performed at seven days, one month, and three months to evaluate graft acceptance and hearing improvement using pure tone audiometry (PTA). Statistical analyses included the chi-square test, t-test, ANOVA, and paired t-test. Results The study included patients with a mean age of 38.1 years, predominantly female (71.67%). ET demonstrated superior anatomical outcomes compared to PA, with higher graft acceptance rates and better hearing improvements. The average hearing gain was 10.4 dB in the ET group versus 8.1 dB in the PA group. PRP uses enhanced graft acceptance and hearing restoration across both surgical approaches, contributing to better overall outcomes. Conclusion ET offers significant advantages over conventional postaural tympanoplasty in terms of anatomical and functional results. PRP further improves surgical outcomes, making ET a preferable option for tympanoplasty in COM patients. These findings support the broader adoption of ET and PRP to enhance patient outcomes in tympanoplasty procedures.
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.