ArticleJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale
Endoscopic Type I Tympanoplasty: Comparative Outcomes of Autograft, Allograft, and Xenograft.
Article in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ImportanceTo our knowledge, this represents the first adult-only, fully endoscopic, three-arm comparative cohort of autograft, allograft, and xenograft materials in type I tympanoplasty.ObjectiveTo compare graft-take, audiometric outcomes, operative time, and complications among perichondrium, MegaDerm, and Biodesign in adult endoscopic type I tympanoplasty.
designRetrospective comparative cohort study.
settingTertiary referral center.
participantsAdults who underwent endoscopic type I tympanoplasty with perichondrium, MegaDerm or Biodesign between October 2021 and March 2025. Patients with revision surgery, concomitant otologic procedures, active middle-ear disease, profound sensorineural hearing loss, preoperative air-bone gap (ABG) ≥50 dB, or follow-up <3 months were excluded.Intervention or ExposuresEndoscopic type I tympanoplasty using perichondrium (autograft), MegaDerm (allograft), or Biodesign (xenograft).
main outcome measuresGraft-take rate, hearing gain (air-conduction and ABG), operative time, and complications.ResultsNinety-three ears were analyzed (perichondrium n = 33; MegaDerm n = 21; Biodesign n = 39). Three-month graft-take rates were similar, and final graft-take rates remained comparable across groups (3 months: 90.9%, 90.5%, 94.9%;
conclusionIn adult endoscopic type I tympanoplasty, perichondrium, MegaDerm, and Biodesign demonstrated comparable short-term graft-take and audiometric outcomes, while commercially available grafts were associated with shorter operative time. RELEVANCE: These findings support patient-centered graft selection balancing donor-site considerations, operative efficiency, and cost; prospective studies with standardized follow-up and patient-reported outcomes are warranted.
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.