Comparison of Endoscopic Tympanoplasty to Microscopic Tympanoplasty
- PMID: 27334511
- PMCID: PMC5327595
- DOI: 10.21053/ceo.2016.00080
Comparison of Endoscopic Tympanoplasty to Microscopic Tympanoplasty
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to compare the outcome of endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty.
Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study of 73 patients (35 males and 38 females) who underwent type I tympanoplasty at Samsung Medical Center from April to December 2014. The subjects were classified into two groups; endoscopic tympanoplasty (ET, n=25), microscopic tympanoplasty (MT, n=48). Demographic data, perforation size of tympanic membrane at preoperative state, pure tone audiometric results preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively, operation time, sequential postoperative pain scale (NRS-11), and graft success rate were evaluated.
Results: The perforation size of the tympanic membrane in ET and MT group was 25.3%±11.7% and 20.1%±11.9%, respectively (P=0.074). Mean operation time of MT (88.9±28.5 minutes) was longer than that of the ET (68.2±22.1 minutes) with a statistical significance (P=0.002). External auditory canal (EAC) width was shorter in the ET group than in the MT group (P=0.011). However, EAC widening was not necessary in the ET group and was performed in 33.3% of patients in the MT group. Graft success rate in the ET and MT group were 100% and 95.8%, respectively; the values were not significantly different (P=0.304). Pre- and postoperative audiometric results including bone and air conduction thresholds and air-bone gap were not significantly different between the groups. In all groups, the postoperative air-bone gap was significantly improved compared to the preoperative air-bone gap. Immediate postoperative pain was similar between the groups. However, pain of 1 day after surgery was significantly less in the ET group.
Conclusion: With endoscopic system, minimal invasive tympanoplasty can be possible with similar graft success rate and less pain.
Keywords: Endoscopy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Pain; Tympanoplasty.
Conflict of interest statement
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Figures



Similar articles
-
Comparison of transcanal endoscopic tympanoplasty with sterile acellular dermal allograft to conventional endaural microscopic tympanoplasty with tragal perichondrium.Am J Otolaryngol. 2018 Mar-Apr;39(2):167-170. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2017.11.014. Epub 2017 Dec 7. Am J Otolaryngol. 2018. PMID: 29290312
-
A Comparative Study of Endoscopic versus Microscopic Cartilage Type I Tympanoplasty.Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020 Jan;24(1):e80-e85. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1693139. Epub 2019 Nov 4. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2020. PMID: 31892962 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative study of endoscopic and microscopic tympanoplasty performed by a single experienced surgeon.Am J Otolaryngol. 2021 Jan-Feb;42(1):102788. doi: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2020.102788. Epub 2020 Oct 23. Am J Otolaryngol. 2021. PMID: 33171411
-
Learning curve comparable study of microscopic and endoscopic type 1 tympanoplasty.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2023 Jun;280(6):2741-2748. doi: 10.1007/s00405-022-07777-x. Epub 2022 Dec 13. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2023. PMID: 36512107 Review.
-
Endoscopic type I tympanoplasty is as effective as microscopic type I tympanoplasty but less invasive-A meta-analysis.Clin Otolaryngol. 2019 Nov;44(6):942-953. doi: 10.1111/coa.13407. Epub 2019 Oct 4. Clin Otolaryngol. 2019. PMID: 31356724
Cited by
-
Learning Curve of Two Handed Endoscopic Ear Surgery on Sheep Temporal Bone: A Fellow's Perspective.Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022 Aug;74(Suppl 1):550-558. doi: 10.1007/s12070-021-02388-0. Epub 2021 Jan 21. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022. PMID: 36032876 Free PMC article.
-
Outcomes of endoscopic transcanal type 1 cartilage tympanoplasty.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Dec;276(12):3295-3299. doi: 10.1007/s00405-019-05636-w. Epub 2019 Sep 13. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019. PMID: 31520162
-
Can Endoscopic Tympanoplasty Be a Good Alternative to Microscopic Tympanoplasty? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 May;12(2):145-155. doi: 10.21053/ceo.2018.01277. Epub 2019 Jan 25. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2019. PMID: 30674106 Free PMC article.
-
Endoscopic or Microscopic Tympanoplasty Advantages and Disadvantages: A Theory Domain Systematic Review.Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022 Jul 13;27(3):e528-e535. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1748808. eCollection 2023 Jul. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2022. PMID: 37564466 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A Study of One-Day Bilateral Endoscopic Tympanoplasty vs. Conventional Microscopic Tympanoplasty.Cureus. 2025 Jan 14;17(1):e77424. doi: 10.7759/cureus.77424. eCollection 2025 Jan. Cureus. 2025. PMID: 39949433 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Zollner F. The principles of plastic surgery of the sound-conducting apparatus. J Laryngol Otol. 1955 Oct;69(10):637–52. - PubMed
-
- Dornhoffer JL. Hearing results with cartilage tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1997 Aug;107(8):1094–9. - PubMed
-
- Thomassin JM, Duchon-Doris JM, Emram B, Rud C, Conciatori J, Vilcoq P. Endoscopic ear surgery: initial evaluation. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac. 1990;107(8):564–70. - PubMed
-
- Marchioni D, Alicandri-Ciufelli M, Piccinini A, Genovese E, Presutti L. Inferior retrotympanum revisited: an endoscopic anatomic study. Laryngoscope. 2010 Sep;120(9):1880–6. - PubMed
-
- Ayache S, Tramier B, Strunski V. Otoendoscopy in cholesteatoma surgery of the middle ear: what benefits can be expected? Otol Neurotol. 2008 Dec;29(8):1085–90. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous