Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Type-1 Tympanoplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Abstract

Totally endoscopic ear surgery is becoming increasingly utilized in otologic practice. Although the well-established microscope-assisted tympanoplasty remains the most common technique to repair a tympanic membrane defect, the merits of endoscopic approaches have been well-documented. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the outcomes of endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty incorporating only randomized trials. Systematic review and meta-analysis. A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was conducted. All randomized studies comparing endoscopic to microscopic tympanoplasty were collected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Quality assessment was carried out utilizing the Risk of Bias 2. The initial search identified 1711 studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria comprising of 540 patients (microscopic tympanoplasty 51.5%; endoscopic tympanoplasty 49.5%). The mean age was 32.5 years with a similar number of males (50.1%) and females (49.9%). Both endoscopic and microscopic groups had comparable outcomes with regards to graft success rate (RD 0.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.04 to. 0.05; p = 0.87) and hearing improvement (MD 0.57 dB; 95% CI, -1.23 to 2.36; p = 0.54). A significantly shorter operative time was noted in the endoscopic group (MD, -24.73 min; 95% CI, -38.56 to -10.89; p = 0.0005). Our results, assimilating level 1 evidence, demonstrates that endoscopic and microscopic-assisted type-1 tympanoplasty have similar outcomes in both graft success and hearing improvement, with endoscopic approaches yielding a shorter operative time. 1 Laryngoscope, 133:1550-1557, 2023.