Results
During the study period, 100 patients were included, out of which 6 and
4 patients had lost to follow up in MT and ET group, and thus, only 90
patients were assessed. The demographic profile including age, sex, site
of perforation, graft uptake rate and follow up range has been shown in
table 1. In the MT group, the mean age of patients was 30.89 ± 11.78,
and the age ranged from 18 to 60 years old, and in the ET group, the
mean age of the patients was 30.43±10.18 ranged from 18 to 57. There was
no statistical difference between the two age groups (p-0.285).
There were 20 males and 24 females in the MT group and 27 males and 19
females in the ET group which was not statistically different (p-0.291).
Based on the laterality of disease, in the MT group, 19 cases were on
the right side and 25 on the left side. In the ET group, 26 cases were
on the right side, and 20 on the left side. Both were statistically
insignificant (p-0.292).
The graft success rate at a minimum of 12 months post-operative period
in the MT group was 81.8% with follow up range of 16.09± 5.071 months
and in ET was 91.3% with a followup of 14.67±4.02 months. Three cases
in MT and one case in ET which had initial graft uptake seen at 6 months
later failed during follow up of 12 months period. There seem to be
improved graft uptake percentage seen in ET then MT however, the data
was not statistically significant between the two groups. (p-0.225).
Mean surgical duration was defined as the time of margin freshening up
to the time where the ear pack was kept.
The mean operative time for MT and
ET was 68.68±18.79 minutes and 61.24 ± 11.18 minutes respectively.
The difference obtained was
statistically significant (p-0.003). Endoscopic tympanoplasty
significantly saved time than the microscopic tympanoplasty.
Hearing outcomes were as shown in table 2. There was a highly
statistically significant hearing outcome within the group before and
after the surgery in both groups, endoscopic and microscopic. But there
was no change in hearing outcomes between the two groups. Thus, the
hearing outcome didn’t change with either use of an endoscope or a
microscope.