Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective And Intervention: To compare the efficacy of the inlay, composite chondroperichondrial clip (triple-C) tympanoplasty with conventional underlay cartilage island tympanoplasty, and to evaluate its efficacy in treating large, marginal perforations.
Study Design: The study involved 183 patients that were selected from a retrospective chart review of tympanoplasties performed at our center from March 2016 to June 2018.
Setting: A tertiary referral center hospital.
Patients: 65 patients underwent inlay, triple-C cartilage tympanoplasty (inlay group) and 118 underwent underlay cartilage island tympanoplasty (underlay group).
Main Outcome Measures: Postoperative anatomical success rate, surgical time, hearing outcomes, and complications were analyzed. Focused analysis was performed on large or marginal perforations.
Results: Both groups exhibited similar characteristics in demographic distribution, general health status, preoperative anatomical and hearing disabilities. Excellent results were achieved in both groups. Re-perforation occurred for 9.2% of the inlay group and 7.6% of the underlay group (p = 0.71). Hearing improvement was significant in both groups. Within the separate groups, 36% of underlay patients and 60% of inlay patients improved to achieve closure of the air-bone gap (ABG) to less than 10 dB (p = 0.1). In large or marginal perforations, both groups performed similarly. No significant complications were seen in this cohort. Nevertheless, a significant reduction in surgical time was observed in the inlay group (38 min. vs 58 min.; p = 0.0004).
Conclusion: Inlay triple-C tympanoplasty is comparable to conventional underlay cartilage island tympanoplasty in both anatomical and audiological success rates, even for large, marginal perforations. Due to its shorter operation time, inlay triple-C tympanoplasty should be considered a good surgical option for all tympanic membrane perforations.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06439-0 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!