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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Laryngoscope 2023-07, Vol.133 (7), p.1550-1557 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & 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 |