Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-6wbsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-26T11:55:52.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparative analysis of permeatal and post-aural approaches in tympanoplasty: patient perspectives and quality of life

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2025

Waqas Jamil*
Affiliation:
ENT Department, University Hospital North Midlands NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Haissan Iftikhar
Affiliation:
University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
Farah Naz
Affiliation:
Dow University of Health and Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan
Sanjiv Kumar Bhimrao
Affiliation:
ENT Department, University Hospital North Midlands NHS Foundation Trust, UK
*
Corresponding author: Waqas Jamil; Email: dr.waqasjamil@yahoo.com

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to compare permeatal and post-aural tympanoplasty techniques, focusing on scar perception, post-operative symptoms, return to work and quality of life.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted in a secondary care hospital, with 54 patients undergoing tympanoplasty via permeatal or post-aural approaches. Outcome measures reported were scar perception, post-operative symptoms, quality of life using the Chronic Otitis Media Benefit Inventory score and time off work reported by patients.

Results

Scar perception was favourable in both groups. In the post-aural group, 96 per cent of patients were content with their scar, while 83 per cent in the permeatal group were unconcerned about having a scar behind the ear. Long-term post-operative symptoms, return to work and quality of life measures were comparable. Chronic Otitis Media Benefit Inventory scores showed no significant difference between techniques.

Conclusion

Patient experiences and perspectives were similar between permeatal and post-aural techniques. Surgeons should consider individual patient factors and outcomes when selecting a surgical approach.

Information

Type
Main Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable