Periosteal Graft Myringoplasty: Our Experience

Abstract

Introduction Different types of autologous graft materials are used for myringoplasty, with the temporalis fascia and cartilage being the most frequently used tissues. Periosteal tissue has been used for a long time in our department, and many advantages support its use in myringoplasty. To the best of our knowledge, this issue is scarcely discussed in the previously published literature.

Objective To present our experience with periosteal graft myringoplasty, describing the technique and the anatomical and functional outcomes.

Methods A prospective clinical study involving 88 patients (72 females and 16 males) with a mean age 26.9 years. The patients underwent myringoplasty using the mastoid cortex periosteum; they were all operated using the postauricular approach, and the graft was applied using the underlay technique. The patients performed pre- and postoperative pure tone audiometry for tested frequencies (0.5 kHz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz, and 4 kHz). All patients were followed-up for at least 12 months after the operation.

Results The anatomical success rate among all patients was of 93%, which is comparable to the rate of success in procedures using other usual grafting materials. In addition, there was a highly significant postoperative improvement in pure tone audiometry results as compared with the preoperative ones (the main hearing gain was of ∼ 11 dB; p < 0.001).

Conclusion The periosteal graft is easily harvested, easy to apply, with excellent anatomical and functional success.

Keywords

myringoplasty - audiometry - periosteum

• References

• 1 Berthold E. Ueber myring oplastik. Wien Med Blätter 1878; 26: 627-639
• 2 Wullstein H. Funktionelle Operationen im Mittelohr mit Hilfe des freien Spaltlappen-Transplantates. Arch Ohren Nasen Kehlkopfheilkd 1952; 161 (2–6): 422-435
• 3 Zöllner F. The principles of plastic surgery of the sound-conducting apparatus. J Laryngol Otol 1955; 69 (10) 637-652
• 4 Sheehy JL, Anderson RG. Myringoplasty. A review of 472 cases. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1980; 89 (4 Pt 1): 331-334
• 5 Lee JC, Lee SR, Nam JK, Lee TH, Kwon JK. Comparison of different grafting techniques in type I tympanoplasty in cases of significant middle ear granulation. Otol Neurotol 2012; 33 (04) 586-590
• 6 Onal K, Arslanoglu S, Songu M, Demiray U, Demirpehlivan IA. Functional results of temporalis fascia versus cartilage tympanoplasty in patients with bilateral chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol 2012; 126 (01) 22-25
• 7 Mancini F, Russo A, Sanna M. Grafting techniques for tympanoplasty. Oper Tech Otolaryngol--Head Neck Surg 1996; 7: 34-37
• 8 Freitas MR, Oliveira TC. The role of different types of grafts in tympanoplasty. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol (Engl Ed) 2014; 80 (04) 275-276
• 9 Demirpehlivan IA, Onal K, Arslanoglu S, Songu M, Ciger E, Can N. Comparison of different tympanic membrane reconstruction techniques in type I tympanoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 268 (03) 471-474
• 10 Chiossone E. Periosteal Grafting in Tympanoplasty: A Preliminary Report. Arch Otolaryngol 1964; 79: 302-311
• 11 El-Taher M, Othman Y, Rizk I, Ali K. Periosteal graft myringoplasty: our experience, presented at the 88th Annual Meeting of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery. 24–27 may 2017, Erfurt. German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2017