Skip to main content Accessibility help

Evaluation and comparison of type I tympanoplasty efficacy and histopathological changes to the tympanic membrane in dry and wet ear: a prospective study

  • R Shankar (a1), R S Virk (a1), K Gupta (a1), A K Gupta (a1), A Bal (a2) and S Bansal (a1)...



This study aimed to compare the success rate of type I tympanoplasty in active (wet) and inactive (dry) mucosal chronic otitis media.


A prospective study was performed of 35 patients each with dry ear and wet ear undergoing type I tympanoplasty in the Otolaryngology Department, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, India. All patients underwent type I tympanoplasty between January 2010 and June 2011 by the post-auricular approach. Samples of the remnant tympanic membrane were sent for histopathological examination.


After a minimum follow up of one year, the success rate was 88.6 per cent for dry ears and 80 per cent for wet ears. Neither the type (p = 0.526) nor the presence (p = 0.324) of discharge influenced the success rate. Histopathological examination of the tympanic membrane margins was performed for 46 patients: of these, 19 showed evidence of vascularity and 27 did not. There was no significant difference in success rate between groups (p = 0.115).


The success rate was not influenced by the presence of ear discharge at the time of surgery, and tympanic membrane vascularity did not influence graft uptake.


Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: Dr R S Virk, Department of Otolaryngology and Head–Neck Surgery, PGIMER, Chandigarh 160012, India Fax: +91 172 2744401 E-mail:,


Hide All
1Browning, GG. Chronic otitis media. In: Gleeson, M, Browning, GG, Burton, MJ et al. , eds. Scott-Brown's Otolaryngology, 7th edn.London: Hodder Arnold, 2008;3: 3396
2House, WF. Myringoplasty. AMA Arch Otolaryngol 1960;71:399404
3Shea, JJ Jr.Vein graft closure of eardrum perforations. J Laryngol Otol 1960;74:358–62
4Stage, J, Bak-Pedersen, K. Underlay tympanoplasty with the graft lateral to the malleus handle. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1992;17:69
5Potsic, WP, Winawer, MR, Marsh, RR. Tympanoplasty for the anterior-superior perforation in children. Am J Otol 1996;17:115–18
6Kartush, JM, Michaelides, EM, Becvarovski, Z, LaRouere, MJ. Over-under tympanoplasty. Laryngoscope 2002;112:802–7
7Yigit, O, Alkan, S, Topuz, E, Uslu, B, Unsal, O, Dadas, B. Short-term evaluation of over-under myringoplasty technique. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2005;262:400–3
8Tos, M. Late results in tympanoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol 1974;100:302–5
9Gibb, AG, Chang, SK. Myringoplasty (A review of 365 operations). J Laryngol Otol 1982;96:915–30
10Booth, JB. Myringoplasty. The lessons of failure. J Laryngol Otol 1974;88:1223–36
11Adkins, WY, White, B. Type I tympanoplasty: Influencing factors. Laryngoscope 1984;94:916–18
12Glassock, ME 3rd, Jackson, CG, Nissen, AJ, Schwaber, MK. Post auricular undersurface tympanic membrane grafting: A follow up report. Laryngoscope 1982;92:718–27
13Sade, J, Berco, E, Brown, M, Weinberg, J, Avraham, S. Myringoplasty: short and long term results in a training program. J Laryngol Otol 1981;95:653–65
14Vijayendra, H, Rangam, CK, Sangeeta, R. Comparative study of tympanoplasty in wet perforation v/s totally dry perforation in tubotympanic disease. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;58:165–7
15Browning, GG. Aetiopathology of inflammatory conditions of the external and middle ear. In: Kerr, AG, ed. Scott-Brown's Otolaryngology, 6th edn.London: Arnold Hodder, 1997;3:1516
16Vartiainen, E, Nuutinen, J. Success and pitfalls in myringoplasty: follow up study of 404 cases. Am J Otol 1993;14:301–5
17Ahad, SH. Myringoplasty by homologous temporalis fascia. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1986;38:28–9
18Yung, MW. Myringoplasty for subtotal perforation. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1995;20:241–5
19Landa Aranzábal, M, Rodríguez García, L, Rivas Salas, A, Navarro Sampedro, JJ, Camacho Arrioaga, JJ, Algaba Guimera, J. Myringoplasty: Onlay vs. underlay. Review of 460 cases [in Spanish]. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 1996;47:21–5
20Sckolnick, JS, Mantle, B, Li, J, Chi, DH. Pediatric myringoplasty: factors that affect success: a retrospective study. Laryngoscope 2008;118:723–9
21Sheahan, P, Donnelly, M, Kane, R. Clinical features of newly presenting cases of chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol 2001;115:962–6
22Loock, JW, Naude, N. A randomised controlled trial comparing fresh, dried, and dried-then-rehydrated temporalis fascia in myringoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol 2008;33:97101
23Glasscock, ME 3rd.Tympanic membrane grafting with fascia: overlay vs undersurface technique. Laryngoscope 1973;83:754–70
24Sheehy, JL, Anderson, RG. Myringoplasty. A review of 472 cases. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1980;89:331–4
25Rizer, FM. Overlay versus underlay tympanoplasty. Part I: historical review of the literature. Laryngoscope 1997;107:125
26Rizer, FM. Overlay versus underlay tympanoplasty. Part II: the study. Laryngoscope 1997;107:2636
27Nagle, SK, Jagade, MV, Gandhi, SR, Pawar, PV. Comparative study of outcome of type I tympanoplasty in dry and wet ear. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;61:138–40
28Kotecha, B, Fowler, S, Topham, J. Myringoplasty: a prospective audit study. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1999;24:126–9
29Raj, A, Tripathi, V. Review of patients undergoing wet myringoplasty. Indian J Otology 1999;5:134–6
30Gersdorff, M, Garin, P, Decat, M, Juantegui, M. Myringoplasty: long-term results in adults and children. Am J Otol 1995;16:532–5
31Onal, K, Uguz, MZ, Kazikdas, KC, Gursoy, ST, Gokce, H. A multivariate analysis of otological, surgical and patient-related factors in determining success in myringoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol 2005;30:115–20
32Bhat, NA, De, R. Retrospective analysis of surgical outcome, symptom changes, and hearing improvement following myringoplasty. J Otolaryngol 2000;29:229–32
33Karela, M, Berry, S, Watkins, A, Phillipps, JJ. Myringoplasty: surgical outcomes and hearing improvement: Is it worth performing to improve hearing? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2008;265:1039–42
34Pignataro, L, Grillo Della Berta, L, Capaccio, P, Zaghis, A. Myringoplasty in children: anatomical and functional results. J Laryngol Otol 2001;115:369–73
35Lee, P, Kelly, G, Mills, RP. Myringoplasty: does the size of the perforation matter? Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2002;27:331–4
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Journal of Laryngology & Otology
  • ISSN: 0022-2151
  • EISSN: 1748-5460
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-laryngology-and-otology
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed