Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2692-9562/099
1 MBBS, MS ENT- Junior resident Department of otorhinolaryngology & head, neck surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar medical college and research Centre. City-Nashik, State- Maharashtra, Country- India.
2 MBBS, MS ENT, DNB ENT-Professor and Head of Department of otorhinolaryngology & head, neck surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar medical college and research Centre. City-Nashik, State- Maharashtra, Country- India.
3 MBBS, MS ENT-Professor Department of otorhinolaryngology & head, neck surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar medical college and research Centre. City-Nashik, State- Maharashtra, Country- India.
4 MBBS, MS ENT-Associate Professor Department of otorhinolaryngology & head, neck surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar medical college and research Centre. City-Nashik, State- MaharashtrSa, Country- India.
5 MBBS MS ENT-Junior resident Department of otorhinolaryngology & head, neck surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar medical college and research Centre. City-Nashik, State- Maharashtra, Country- India.
*Corresponding Author: Nirmala Yamagar, Yamagar Niwas, House No. 879, Ward No. 2, Mayakanagar, Bamnoli, Kupwad, Taluka- Miraj, District-Sangli, State- Maharashtra, Pin code- 416436; India.
Citation: Nirmala Mahadev Yamagar, (2023), Tragal Cartilage Support for Temporalis Fascia Graft in type I Tympanoplasty, J Clinical Otorhinolaryngology, 5(5); DOI:10.31579/2692-9562/099
Copyright: © 2023, Nirmala Yamagar. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
Received: 23 October 2023 | Accepted: 01 November 2023 | Published: 10 November 2023
Keywords: large perforation; subtotal perforation; tragal cartilage; temporalis fascia; tympanoplasty; narrow anterior rim
Aims & objectives: To evaluate the success rate of tympanoplasty type I ln terms of closure of perforation when the graft is supported by tragal cartilage and to evaluate the auditory outcomes in patient undergoing tympanoplasty type 1 with tragal cartilage support.
Background: An observational study was carried out on 43 patients over a period of 2 yrs. From august 2020- December 2022. Patients with Subtotal perforation, large central perforation, anterior and inferior perforation, perforation with tympanosclerotic plaques, revision surgery for failed myringoplasty in Age group of 18-60 yrs. were included. While those with small central perforation, posterior/ posterosuperior perforations, traumatic perforation was excluded. In this procedure, a portion of semi-lunar-shaped tragal cartilage is implanted medial to the anterior remnant of the tympanic membrane. A graft of the temporalis fascia is positioned between cartilage and the anterior portion of the tympanic membrane.
Result: Out of 43 patients, it was observed that 36 (83.72%) of the patients had healthy fascia grafts and 7 (16.28%) of the patients had reperforation in fascia graft.
It was observed that there was a drastic improvement in the hearing dysfunction of the patients. In the pre-operative audiometry, 41 (95.35%) had conductive hearing loss which was reduced to 7 (16.28%) patients in the postoperative study. There was no change in mixed hearing loss patients. The pre- and post-operative audiometry are statistically significant with a p-value <0.001.
Conclusion: In type I tympanoplasty, this study shows that cartilage support for fascia graft is a very dependable approach that significantly improves graft take-up and hearing status.
CSOM - Chronic suppurative otitis media
Dr- Doctor
Fig- figure
dB- Decibel
k- Thousand
TM- Tympanic membrane mm- Millimeter
Std.- Standard
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) tubotympanic type is the most common infective condition of ear, especially in developing nations like India.[1]
Tympanoplasty has been well established since decades as surgery of choice for CSOM. Heermann was the first to introduce the cartilage palisade technique, in 1962 [2].
There is a high risk of failure with subtotal or total perforations, tympanosclerosis and recurrent perforations after tympanoplasty.[3]
Though various methods are practiced for placement of graft in tympanoplasty for Subtotal perforation, failure of perforation is seen in 10 % of cases. The reasons of residual perforations are poor adaptation of graft, displacement of graft which may sink medially or may shift posteriorly or may shrink when the graft is supported medially only by gelfoam.[4].
A novel technique has been introduced in which a small semilunar-shaped piece of tragal cartilage is placed medial to the narrow anterior rim in case of a large or subtotal perforation. The temporalis fascia graft is placed lateral to this cartilage support and medial to the thin anterior rim. [4,5]
This cartilage supports the fascia graft medially firmly and remains in place. It stops the graft from sinking or contracting. This method has a very high percentage of success and significantly improves hearing.
The cartilage graft's extremely low metabolic rate has long been considered its greatest benefit. It gets nutrients by diffusion, is malleable and simple to deal with, and is resistant to deformation due to pressure changes. [6,7,8]
The current study was carried Out at Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College Hospital and Research Centre in Adgaon, Nashik. The institutional ethics committee gave its approval to the study protocol and consent documents. Patients had thorough examinations that included clinical, otoscopy, microscopic, and audiometry examinations. Tympanoplasty type 1 surgery with tragal cartilage support was then performed.
Inclusion criteria
1. Subtotal perforation
2. Large central perforation
3. Anterior and inferior perforation
4. Perforation with tympanosclerotic plaques
5. Revision surgery for failed myringoplasty
6. Age group-18-60 yrs.
Exclusion Criteria
1. Small central perforation
2. Posterior/ posterosuperior perforations
3. Traumatic perforation
4. Age group below 18 and above 60
Postoperative follow/up-

Figure I: Tragal Cartilage. Figure II: Intraoperative Picture of Tragal Cartilage
ALL the results obtained were properly recorded in the excel spreadsheet. The results were analysed on SPSS 25 software. The frequency, mean, percentage, standard deviation, and p-value were calculated. A p-value less than 0.05 was taken as significant. All the obtained results are presented in a tabular and graphical format below. The variables that have been used to assess the outcome of tragal support for fascia graft are perforation size, preoperative hearing loss, tuning fork test, otomicroscopic examination, pure tone pre & post- operative audiometry.
Size of tympanic membrane perforation | Frequency (N) | Percentage (%) |
| Large | 10 | 23.26 |
| Small | 1 | 2.33 |
| Moderate | 22 | 51.16 |
| Subtotal | 10 | 23.26 |
| Total | 43 | 100 |
Table I- Study of the size of tympanicmembrane perforation

Table II – Study of the post-operation status of graft

Figure III: Study of post-operative status of graft


Table III: Comparison of pre & post-operative audiometry

Figure IV: Comparison of pre & post -operative audiometry

Table IV: Correlation of pre & post-operative hearing loss at different frequencies

Figure V: Correlation of preop-postop hearing loss at different frequency
The tympanic membrane has been reconstructed using a variety of graft materials, including fat, cartilage, periostia, perichondria, and temporalis fascia. Whatever the graft material utilized, subtotal perforations have always been a challenge to otologists [9]
Currently, temporalis fascia and tragal perichondrium are the most often utilized materials for tympanoplasty. [6]
Because of its accessibility, location, availability, minimal baseline metabolic rate, thickness that is comparable to the tympanic membrane, and great absorption rates in middle ear clefts that are routinely ventilated, temporalis fascia grafts have withstood the test of time. [10]
In cases of tympanic fibrosis, total perforation, an adhesive process, tubal dysfunction, and revision surgery, the healing of the temporalis fascia is significantly worse. [11]
However, in "high risk" situations such as large perforations, revision cases, middle ear disease, eustachian tube dysfunction, and atelectatic ears, cartilage myringoplasty produces satisfactory outcomes. [12]
Because it is readily available, flexible, resistant to negative middle ear pressures, stable, elastic, well-tolerated by the middle ear, and resistant to resorption, cartilage is a satisfactory grafting material. There has been debate over the audiological aspect because of its distinctive stiffness and thickness, but several investigations have shown that the audiological outcomes are satisfactory. [13]
We have made the most of both in this study. To ensure that the perforation closes completely, we are employing a temporalis fascia graft and supporting it with a tiny piece of tragal cartilage.
36 of the 43 patients in our research, or 83.72% of the total, had a successful surgical closure of their perforation. Since resident doctors performed the majority of these surgeries, more experience will produce better outcomes as observed with other comparable studies.
The statistical tests indicated that hearing had significantly improved. All of the following frequencies showed a good degree of air bone gap closure: 250, 500, 1k, 2k, and 4k. The closure was at its lowest at 4k. Although the precise cause of this finding is unknown, the following theories might be valid. Though they are stiffer and thicker than fascia, perichondrium and cartilage are also mesenchymal tissue. They somewhat impede functional outcomes, particularly in the higher tones, by mechanically decreasing the tympanic membrane's vibratory pattern.[14]. Further research and analysis are needed for this finding.
In this study different variables like size of perforation, type of hearing loss, and degree of hearing loss were studied pre- operatively and post-operatively to evaluate the success rate of type I tympanoplasty and the auditory outcome. It was observed that post-operative closure rate of the tympanic membrane was high and audiology improvement was satisfactory. Stable postoperative outcomes are provided by tragal cartilage graft, with significant maintenance of auditory function and lower rates of reperforation.
Furthermore, cartilage is an excellent grafting material since it is easily accessible, adaptable, resistant to negative middle ear pressures, stable, elastic, well tolerated by the middle ear, and resistant to resorption. It provides strong support for the temporalis fascia graft. The anterior boundary becomes more effective. Graft does not sink in middle ear. If the temporalis fascia graft is properly tucked in, the graft does not retract backward. The anterior tympanic membrane is only supported by 1-2 mm. Therefore, it does not impair TM's movement. The eustachian tube continues to operate normally.
This approach is effective and a good substitute for traditional tympanoplasty for big or subtotal central perforations.
Dear Editorial Team, Clinical Medical Reviews and Reports. My experience with the journal was highly positive. The peer-review process was rigorous, constructive, and completed in a timely manner. The reviewers provided valuable comments that helped improve the quality and clarity of our manuscript. The editorial office was professional, responsive, and supportive throughout all stages of the publication process. Communication was clear and efficient, and any questions were addressed promptly. Overall, I found the journal to maintain high scientific standards and an excellent publication workflow. I would be pleased to consider submitting future work to this journal. Best wishes from, Elena Popa.
It was my pleasure to submit my testimonial concerning the Reviewer Board of our Scientific Journal “Brain and Neurological Disorders”. The Reviewers focused on some modifications and their contribution was helpful. The ladies of our Editorial Office were also supported my efforts. It was my honor to have such a co-operation and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
Dear Grace Pierce, Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports, Thank you for the speedy and efficient peer review process. I appreciate the fact that your peer reviewers do not take months to respond like with some other journals. I would also like to thank the editorial office for responding quickly to my questions. It is an excellent journal. I plan to submit more manuscripts in the future. Best wishes from, Robert W. McGee
Dear Grace Pierce, Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports, Working with you and your team on our recent publication in JCRR has been a truly wonderful and enjoyable experience. The responses were prompt, and the reviewers were patient, constructive, and highly professional. One reviewer in particular gave me the feeling that a professor was carefully reading and commenting on my coursework, which was deeply touching. The entire process was straightforward and hassle‑free, with no tedious online forms to complete. I highly recommend this journal. Best wishes from, DR Aibing Rao, Head of R&D
I Appreciate the Opportunity to Share my Experience with the Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. The peer review process was timely and constructive, and the feedback provided helped improve the quality of our manuscript. The editorial office was professional, responsive, and supportive throughout the process, ensuring smooth communication and efficient handling of the submission. Overall, it was a positive experience collaborating with your team.
Dear Mercy Grace, Editorial Coordinator of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, We would like to express our gratitude for your help at all stages of publishing and editing the article. The editors of the magazine answer all the necessary questions and help at every stage. We will definitely continue to cooperate and publish other works in the Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences! Best wishes from, Alla Konstantinovna Politova,