# Comparative Study of Endoscopic Transcanal Tympanoplasty and Tympanoplasty by Conventional Postaural Approach in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Central India

## TL;DR

This study compares two surgical methods for repairing ear membranes in chronic ear infections, finding that the endoscopic approach offers better results and benefits from using platelet-rich plasma.

## Contribution

The study provides a comparative analysis of endoscopic transcanal and conventional postaural tympanoplasty, including the novel use of PRP in both techniques.

## Key findings

- Endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty showed higher graft acceptance and better hearing improvement than the conventional approach.
- The average hearing gain was 10.4 dB for endoscopic surgery versus 8.1 dB for conventional surgery.
- Platelet-rich plasma improved outcomes in both surgical techniques.

## Abstract

Background

Chronic otitis media (COM) often necessitates tympanoplasty to repair the tympanic membrane. While conventional postaural tympanoplasty (PA) is well-established, endoscopic transcanal tympanoplasty (ET) is gaining traction for its minimally invasive benefits. This study aims to compare these two surgical techniques regarding their anatomical and functional outcomes and assess the role of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in improving these outcomes.

Material and methods

This prospective comparative study was conducted at Acharya Vinoba Bhave Rural Hospital, involving 60 patients with COM. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either ET or PA, with each group further subdivided based on PRP use. Preoperative evaluations included auditory function tests and diagnostic endoscopy. Postoperative assessments were performed at seven days, one month, and three months to evaluate graft acceptance and hearing improvement using pure tone audiometry (PTA). Statistical analyses included the chi-square test, t-test, ANOVA, and paired t-test.

Results

The study included patients with a mean age of 38.1 years, predominantly female (71.67%). ET demonstrated superior anatomical outcomes compared to PA, with higher graft acceptance rates and better hearing improvements. The average hearing gain was 10.4 dB in the ET group versus 8.1 dB in the PA group. PRP uses enhanced graft acceptance and hearing restoration across both surgical approaches, contributing to better overall outcomes.

Conclusion

ET offers significant advantages over conventional postaural tympanoplasty in terms of anatomical and functional results. PRP further improves surgical outcomes, making ET a preferable option for tympanoplasty in COM patients. These findings support the broader adoption of ET and PRP to enhance patient outcomes in tympanoplasty procedures.