Introduction: The surgical procedure of myringoplasty is performed for the repair of tympanic membrane perforations. This study aims to compare endoscopic myringoplasty with microscopic myringoplasty surgery based on uptake of graft, hearing improvement in terms of pure tone audiograms performed preoperatively and postoperatively, complications in the postoperative period, and subjective cosmetic results.
Materials and methods: Between January 2019 and December 2019, 100 patients were subjected to myringoplasty, 50 performed endoscopically and 50 performed microscopically. Results were compared 3 months following the surgery.
Results: This article reveals that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the success rate. In this study, the endoscopic myringoplasty group shows fewer incidences of postoperative pain and better cosmetic results.
Conclusion: Most of the disadvantages of the microscope can be overcome by an endoscope by virtue of its wide-angled telescopic and magnified view. However, the endoscope has the disadvantages of a comparative lack of depth perception and one-handed technique. These can be easily overcome with practice. Thus, endoscopic myringoplasty may be a good alternative to microscopic myringoplasty.
Clinical significance: The study gives significant insight into the comparative outcomes of endoscopic and microscopic myringoplasty.
Browning G, Merchant S, Kelly G, et al. Chronic otitis media. In Gleeson M, ed. Scott Brown's otorhinolaryngology and head & neck surgery. 7. London: Hodder Arnold; 2008. pp. 3395–3445.
Tan HE, Santa Maria PL, Eikelboom RH, et al. Type I tympanoplasty meta-analysis: a single variable analysis. Otol Neurotol 2016;37(7):838–846. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001099.
Harugop AS, Mudhol RS, Godhi A. Comparative study of endoscope assisted myringoplasty and microscope assisted myringoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;60(4):298–302. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-008-0099-5.
Garcia LB, Moussalem GF, Andrade JSC, et al. Transcanal endoscopic myringoplasty: a case series in a university center. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2016;82(3):321–325. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2015.05.012.
Patel J, Aiyer RG, Gajjar Y, et al. Endoscopic tympanoplasty vs microscopic tympanoplasty in tubotympanic csom: a comparative study of 44 cases. Int J Res Med Sci 2015;3(8):1953–1957. DOI: 10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20150307 Lakpathi G. Comparative study of ndoscope assisted myringoplasty and microscopic myringoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016;68(2):185–190.
Kumar M, Kanaujia SK, Singh A. A comparative study of endoscopic myringoplasty vs conventional myringoplasty. Int J Otorhinolaryngol Clin 2015;7(3):132–137. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10003-1209.
Quraishi MS, Jones NS. Day care myringoplasty using tragal perichondrium. Clin Otolaryngol 1995;20(1):12–14. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1995.tb00004.x.
Gadag R. Comparative study of outcomes of microscopic versus endoscopic myringoplasty. Medica Innovatica 2016;5((1):3–6.
Tarabichi M. Endoscopic middle ear surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1999 Jan;108(1):39–46. DOI: 10.1177/000348949910800106.
Usami S, Iijima N, Fujita S, et al. Endoscopic-assisted myringoplasty. ORL 2001;63(5):287–290. DOI: 10.1159/000055759.
Choi N, Noh Y, Park W, et al. Comparison of endoscopic tympanoplasty to microscopic tympanoplasty. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2017;10(1):44–49. DOI: 10.21053/ceo.2016.00080.
Kozin ED, Gulati S, Kaplan AB, et al. Systematic review of outcomes following observational and operative endoscopic middle ear surgery. Laryngoscope 2015;125(5):1205–1214. DOI: 10.1002/lary.25048.
Jyothi AC, Shrikrishna BH, Kulkarni NH, et al. Endoscopic myringoplasty versus microscopic myringoplasty in tubotympanic CSOM: a comparative study of 120 cases. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017;69(3):357–362. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-017-1147-9.