“Prospective Comparison of Hearing Outcomes Using Three Grafts in Type 1 Tympanoplasty” Temporalis Fascia, Fascia Lata, and Tragal Perichondrium
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background:
Type 1 tympanoplasty is the standard treatment for chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) with conductive hearing loss. Graft material choice plays a critical role in surgical outcomes, yet comparative data are limited.
Objective:
To compare hearing improvement and graft uptake rates using temporalis fascia, fascia lata, and tragal perichondrium in Type 1 tympanoplasty.
Methods:
A prospective study was conducted on 105 CSOM (tubotympanic type) patients undergoing Type 1 tympanoplasty at R.D. Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, from August 2023 to February 2025. Patients were randomly assigned to three graft groups (n=35 each). Outcomes assessed at 3 months included graft uptake and hearing improvement via pure tone audiometry and air-bone gap closure.
Results:
Graft uptake was successful in 91.4% of patients. Temporalis fascia showed the highest uptake (94.3%), followed by fascia lata (91.4%) and tragal perichondrium (88.6%). Fascia lata demonstrated the greatest hearing gain (mean PTA improvement: 18.72±10.01 dB), followed by tragal perichondrium (19.58±4.17 dB) and temporalis fascia (15.80±5.49 dB). All groups showed statistically significant hearing improvement (p<0.001) with minimal complications.
Conclusion:
All grafts are safe and effective for Type 1 tympanoplasty. Temporalis fascia ensures better graft uptake, while fascia lata offers superior hearing outcomes, especially when mastoidectomy is performed. Graft choice should be tailored to individual cases.
Keywords: Tympanoplasty, chronic suppurative otitis media, temporalis fascia, fascia lata, tragal perichondrium, hearing improvement
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
1. Goycoolea MV, Hueb MM, Ruah C. Otitis media: the pathogenesis approach. Definitions and terminology. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 1991;24:757-61.
2. Bhutta MF, Leach AJ, Brennan-Jones CG. Chronic suppurative otitis media. Lancet. 2024;403:2339-48.
3. Mittal R, Lisi CV, Gerring R, Mittal J, Mathee K, Narasimhan G, et al. Current concepts in the pathogenesis and treatment of chronic suppurative otitis media. J Med Microbiol. 2015;64:1103-16.
4. Morris P. Chronic suppurative otitis media. BMJ Clin Evid. 2012;2012:0507.
5. Lee MR, Pawlowski KS, Luong A, Furze AD, Roland PS. Biofilm presence in humans with chronic suppurative otitis media. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;141:567-71.
6. Wullstein H. Theory and practice of tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope. 1956;66:1076-93.
7. House WF. Myringoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1960;71:399-404.
8. Sarkar S. A review on the history of tympanoplasty. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;65:455-60.
9. Patterson ME, Lockwood RW, Sheehy JL. Temporalis fascia in tympanic membrane grafting: tissue culture and animal studies. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1967;85:287-91.
10. Wahid FI, Nagra SR. Tympanoplasty type-I using tragal perichondrium graft: our experience. Pak J Med Sci. 2019;35:1076-80.
11. Abdel Fattah AA, Elasy AHR, Hoseini AH, Abdel Hafez TAR. Comparative study between fascia lata and temporalis fascia in myringoplasty. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2020;36:48.
12. Mudry A. Fascia temporalis as tympanic graft: a Swedish and German story. Surg Innov. 2022;29:295-8.
13. Maheshwari A, Panigrahi R, Mahajan S. Comparison of temporalis fascia with tragal cartilage-perichondrium (composite graft) as a grafting material in type I tympanoplasty: a prospective randomized study. Int J Sci Study. 2015;3:1-6.
14. Patil K, Baisakhiya N, Deshmukh P. Evaluation of different graft material in type 1 tympanoplasty. Indian J Otol. 2014;20:106.
15. Indorewala S, Adedeji TO, Indorewala A, Nemade G. Tympanoplasty outcomes: a review of 789 cases. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;27:101-8.
16. Glasscock ME. Tympanic membrane grafting with fascia: overlay vs. undersurface technique. Laryngoscope. 1973;83:754-70.
17. Sheahan P, O'Dwyer T, Blayney A. Results of type 1 tympanoplasty in children and parental perceptions of outcome of surgery. J Laryngol Otol. 2002;116:430-4.
18. Smith BD, Martin HL, Francis HW, Cunningham CD. Vein graft tympanoplasty: how a transiently used graft material transformed middle ear surgery. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022;166:334-6.
19. Ko CA, Yang CH, Wu CN, Huang P, Hwang CF. Comparison of the functional success of fat myringoplasty and perifascial areolar tympanoplasty in transcanal endoscopic ear surgery. Ear Nose Throat J. 2022;101:314-8.
20. Yoon TH, Park SK, Kim JY, Pae KH, Ahn JH. Tympanoplasty, with or without mastoidectomy, is highly effective for treatment of chronic otitis media in children. Acta Otolaryngol. 2007;127:44-8.
21. Patil K, Baisakhiya N, Deshmukh P. Evaluation of different graft material in type 1 tympanoplasty. Indian J Otol. 2014;20:106.
22. Landge SU, Jatale PV, Kirdak V, Chintale S, Shaikh K. Comparative study of temporalis fascia graft, tragal cartilage graft and fascia lata in tubotympanic type of CSOM. MedPulse Int J ENT. 2019;9:37-40.
23. Abdel Fattah AA, Elasy AHR, Hoseini AH, Abdel Hafez TAR. Comparative study between fascia lata and temporalis fascia in myringoplasty. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2020;36:48.
24. Kennedy KL, Lin JW. Mastoidectomy. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.