Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type‐1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials

Objectives Totally endoscopic ear surgery is becoming increasingly utilized in otologic practice. Although the well‐established microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the most common technique to repair a tympanic membrane defect, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. Thi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Laryngoscope 2023-07, Vol.133 (7), p.1550-1557
Hauptverfasser: Crotty, Thomas J., Cleere, Eoin F., Keogh, Ivan J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1557
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1550
container_title The Laryngoscope
container_volume 133
creator Crotty, Thomas J.
Cleere, Eoin F.
Keogh, Ivan J.
description Objectives Totally endoscopic ear surgery is becoming increasingly utilized in otologic practice. Although the well‐established microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the most common technique to repair a tympanic membrane defect, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. Study Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was conducted. All randomized studies comparing endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty were collected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. Quality assessment was carried out utilizing the Risk of Bias 2. Results The initial search identified 1711 studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria comprising of 540 patients (microscopic tympanoplasty 51.5%; endoscopic tympanoplasty 49.5%). The mean age was 32.5 years with a similar number of males (50.1%) and females (49.9%). Both endoscopic and microscopic groups had comparable outcomes with regards to graft success rate (RD 0.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.04 to. 0.05; p = 0.87) and hearing improvement (MD 0.57 dB; 95% CI, −1.23 to 2.36; p = 0.54). A significantly shorter operative time was noted in the endoscopic group (MD, −24.73 min; 95% CI, −38.56 to −10.89; p = 0.0005). Conclusion Our results, assimilating level 1 evidence, demonstrates that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time. Level of Evidence 1 Laryngoscope, 133:1550–1557, 2023 Although microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the gold standard, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. The result from this meta‐analysis provides level 1 evidence demonstrating that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/lary.30479
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2734614016</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2734614016</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3939-bcc0fbca8a28d925e6e46e76f9923adddf9a7426f81f70f121efc111ef47ab493</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kN1KwzAUx4Mobk5vfAApeCNCZ77aNN6VMT9gQxhTFISSpglE2rU2K1KvfASf0ScxtZsXXnhzziHnx5-THwDHCI4RhPgiF3U7JpAyvgOGKCDIp5wHu2DolsSPAvw4AAfWvkCIGAngPhiQkFAekWAInqerrLSyrIz0HlRtG-vNjay3T8u2Ul8fn8gNRSVWZZULu24vvdibq7Vwm3gl8tYa65XaWwiXVZh3lXnL2ojcHoI97Zo62vQRuL-aLic3_uzu-nYSz3xJOOF-KiXUqRSRwFHGcaBCRUPFQs05JiLLMs0FozjUEdIMaoSR0hIhVykTKeVkBM763KouXxtl10lhrFR5LlaqbGyCGaEhohCFDj39g76UTe0-4agId-dQRhx13lOdCVsrnVS1KZzmBMGkc550zpMf5w4-2UQ2aaGyX3Qr2QGoB95Mrtp_opJZvHjqQ78BNZeOpA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2823939473</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type‐1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Crotty, Thomas J. ; Cleere, Eoin F. ; Keogh, Ivan J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Crotty, Thomas J. ; Cleere, Eoin F. ; Keogh, Ivan J.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives Totally endoscopic ear surgery is becoming increasingly utilized in otologic practice. Although the well‐established microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the most common technique to repair a tympanic membrane defect, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. Study Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was conducted. All randomized studies comparing endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty were collected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. Quality assessment was carried out utilizing the Risk of Bias 2. Results The initial search identified 1711 studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria comprising of 540 patients (microscopic tympanoplasty 51.5%; endoscopic tympanoplasty 49.5%). The mean age was 32.5 years with a similar number of males (50.1%) and females (49.9%). Both endoscopic and microscopic groups had comparable outcomes with regards to graft success rate (RD 0.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.04 to. 0.05; p = 0.87) and hearing improvement (MD 0.57 dB; 95% CI, −1.23 to 2.36; p = 0.54). A significantly shorter operative time was noted in the endoscopic group (MD, −24.73 min; 95% CI, −38.56 to −10.89; p = 0.0005). Conclusion Our results, assimilating level 1 evidence, demonstrates that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time. Level of Evidence 1 Laryngoscope, 133:1550–1557, 2023 Although microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the gold standard, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. The result from this meta‐analysis provides level 1 evidence demonstrating that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0023-852X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-4995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/lary.30479</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36349835</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>endoscopic ear surgery ; endoscopic tympanoplasty ; Endoscopy ; Laryngoscopy ; Meta-analysis ; myringoplasty ; otology ; Systematic review ; type‐1 tympanoplasty</subject><ispartof>The Laryngoscope, 2023-07, Vol.133 (7), p.1550-1557</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.</rights><rights>2022 The Authors. The Laryngoscope published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.</rights><rights>2022. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3939-bcc0fbca8a28d925e6e46e76f9923adddf9a7426f81f70f121efc111ef47ab493</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3939-bcc0fbca8a28d925e6e46e76f9923adddf9a7426f81f70f121efc111ef47ab493</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2750-3057 ; 0000-0001-6652-8797</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Flary.30479$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Flary.30479$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36349835$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Crotty, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleere, Eoin F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keogh, Ivan J.</creatorcontrib><title>Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type‐1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials</title><title>The Laryngoscope</title><addtitle>Laryngoscope</addtitle><description>Objectives Totally endoscopic ear surgery is becoming increasingly utilized in otologic practice. Although the well‐established microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the most common technique to repair a tympanic membrane defect, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. Study Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was conducted. All randomized studies comparing endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty were collected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. Quality assessment was carried out utilizing the Risk of Bias 2. Results The initial search identified 1711 studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria comprising of 540 patients (microscopic tympanoplasty 51.5%; endoscopic tympanoplasty 49.5%). The mean age was 32.5 years with a similar number of males (50.1%) and females (49.9%). Both endoscopic and microscopic groups had comparable outcomes with regards to graft success rate (RD 0.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.04 to. 0.05; p = 0.87) and hearing improvement (MD 0.57 dB; 95% CI, −1.23 to 2.36; p = 0.54). A significantly shorter operative time was noted in the endoscopic group (MD, −24.73 min; 95% CI, −38.56 to −10.89; p = 0.0005). Conclusion Our results, assimilating level 1 evidence, demonstrates that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time. Level of Evidence 1 Laryngoscope, 133:1550–1557, 2023 Although microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the gold standard, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. The result from this meta‐analysis provides level 1 evidence demonstrating that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time.</description><subject>endoscopic ear surgery</subject><subject>endoscopic tympanoplasty</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Laryngoscopy</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>myringoplasty</subject><subject>otology</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>type‐1 tympanoplasty</subject><issn>0023-852X</issn><issn>1531-4995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kN1KwzAUx4Mobk5vfAApeCNCZ77aNN6VMT9gQxhTFISSpglE2rU2K1KvfASf0ScxtZsXXnhzziHnx5-THwDHCI4RhPgiF3U7JpAyvgOGKCDIp5wHu2DolsSPAvw4AAfWvkCIGAngPhiQkFAekWAInqerrLSyrIz0HlRtG-vNjay3T8u2Ul8fn8gNRSVWZZULu24vvdibq7Vwm3gl8tYa65XaWwiXVZh3lXnL2ojcHoI97Zo62vQRuL-aLic3_uzu-nYSz3xJOOF-KiXUqRSRwFHGcaBCRUPFQs05JiLLMs0FozjUEdIMaoSR0hIhVykTKeVkBM763KouXxtl10lhrFR5LlaqbGyCGaEhohCFDj39g76UTe0-4agId-dQRhx13lOdCVsrnVS1KZzmBMGkc550zpMf5w4-2UQ2aaGyX3Qr2QGoB95Mrtp_opJZvHjqQ78BNZeOpA</recordid><startdate>202307</startdate><enddate>202307</enddate><creator>Crotty, Thomas J.</creator><creator>Cleere, Eoin F.</creator><creator>Keogh, Ivan J.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2750-3057</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6652-8797</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202307</creationdate><title>Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type‐1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials</title><author>Crotty, Thomas J. ; Cleere, Eoin F. ; Keogh, Ivan J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3939-bcc0fbca8a28d925e6e46e76f9923adddf9a7426f81f70f121efc111ef47ab493</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>endoscopic ear surgery</topic><topic>endoscopic tympanoplasty</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Laryngoscopy</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>myringoplasty</topic><topic>otology</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>type‐1 tympanoplasty</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Crotty, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleere, Eoin F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keogh, Ivan J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Crotty, Thomas J.</au><au>Cleere, Eoin F.</au><au>Keogh, Ivan J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type‐1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials</atitle><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle><addtitle>Laryngoscope</addtitle><date>2023-07</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>133</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1550</spage><epage>1557</epage><pages>1550-1557</pages><issn>0023-852X</issn><eissn>1531-4995</eissn><abstract>Objectives Totally endoscopic ear surgery is becoming increasingly utilized in otologic practice. Although the well‐established microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the most common technique to repair a tympanic membrane defect, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. Study Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was conducted. All randomized studies comparing endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty were collected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. Quality assessment was carried out utilizing the Risk of Bias 2. Results The initial search identified 1711 studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria comprising of 540 patients (microscopic tympanoplasty 51.5%; endoscopic tympanoplasty 49.5%). The mean age was 32.5 years with a similar number of males (50.1%) and females (49.9%). Both endoscopic and microscopic groups had comparable outcomes with regards to graft success rate (RD 0.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.04 to. 0.05; p = 0.87) and hearing improvement (MD 0.57 dB; 95% CI, −1.23 to 2.36; p = 0.54). A significantly shorter operative time was noted in the endoscopic group (MD, −24.73 min; 95% CI, −38.56 to −10.89; p = 0.0005). Conclusion Our results, assimilating level 1 evidence, demonstrates that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time. Level of Evidence 1 Laryngoscope, 133:1550–1557, 2023 Although microscope‐assisted tympanoplasty remains the gold standard, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well‐documented. This meta‐analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. The result from this meta‐analysis provides level 1 evidence demonstrating that endoscopic and microscopic‐assisted type‐1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>36349835</pmid><doi>10.1002/lary.30479</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2750-3057</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6652-8797</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0023-852X
ispartof The Laryngoscope, 2023-07, Vol.133 (7), p.1550-1557
issn 0023-852X
1531-4995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2734614016
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects endoscopic ear surgery
endoscopic tympanoplasty
Endoscopy
Laryngoscopy
Meta-analysis
myringoplasty
otology
Systematic review
type‐1 tympanoplasty
title Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type‐1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T19%3A40%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Endoscopic%20Versus%20Microscopic%20Type%E2%80%901%20Tympanoplasty:%20A%20Meta%E2%80%90Analysis%20of%20Randomized%20Trials&rft.jtitle=The%20Laryngoscope&rft.au=Crotty,%20Thomas%20J.&rft.date=2023-07&rft.volume=133&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1550&rft.epage=1557&rft.pages=1550-1557&rft.issn=0023-852X&rft.eissn=1531-4995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/lary.30479&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2734614016%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2823939473&rft_id=info:pmid/36349835&rfr_iscdi=true