To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic myringoplasty and comparison with conventional myringoplasty. Materials and Methods: Sixty cases of clinically diagnosed chronic supportive otitis media with dry central perforation were taken into account of which 30 cases were undergone endoscopic myringoplasty and 30 cases undergone conventional myringoplasty. All patients were followed up on 3rd, 7th, 15th day, 6th weeks, 3rd and 6th months after surgery. Results:The tympanic membrane's perforation healing rate was 86% (26/30), in conventional group of myringoplasty and 83% (25/30) in endoscopic group of myringoplasty and average hearing gain in conventional group was 13.96 dB and in endoscopic group was 15.03 dB. Conclusion:The surgical outcome of endoscope assisted myringoplasty in terms of graft uptake and hearing improvement was comparable to the conventional microscope assisted myringoplasty, but in terms of cosmesis and postoperative recovery patients in the endoscope group had better results.
Nasal obstruction due to deviated nasal septum is a common problem encountered by otolaryngologists. A variety of surgical procedures have been tried in the treatment of the same. This study was conducted to evaluate the outcomes and complications of endoscopic and conventional septoplasty. This is a prospective, randomized study. Fifty patients with symptomatic deviated nasal septum were included in the study, 25 of them underwent conventional septoplasty and the rest underwent endoscopic septoplasty. The difference in the functional outcome of both the surgeries was insignificant. There was a significant difference with respect to complications. Endoscopic septoplasty had better outcome with respect to complications. It is easier to correct posterior deviations and isolated spurs with endoscopic septoplasty. Complications are lesser with endoscopic septoplasty.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.