A Short-term Comparison Between Result of Palisade Cartilage Tympanoplasty and Temporalis Fascia Technique

Introduction: The use of cartilage as a grafting material has been advocated in cases where there is a high risk of graft failure, such as subtotal perforations, adhesive processes, and residual defects after primary tympanoplasties. The purpose of this study was to compare the graft acceptance rates and auditory outcomes of cartilage tympanoplasty operations using a palisade technique with those of primary tympanoplasty using temporalis fascia in a homogenous group of patients. Study Design: Prospective study.  Materials and Methods:The study population included 54 patients who were operated on in two groups (palisade technique & temporalis fascia technique) with each group containing 27 patients. Patients with pure subtotal perforations (perforation of >50% of the whole tympanic membrane [TM] area), an intact ossicular chain, at least a one month dry period, and normal middle ear mucosa were included in the study. Grafts acceptance rates and pre- and post-operative audiograms were compared. The follow-up time was six months.  Results: Graft acceptance was achieved in all patients (100%) in the palisade cartilage tympanoplasty group and in 25 patients (92.5%) in the temporalis fascia group. This difference was not statistically significant (P= 0.15). Comparison of the increases in mean speech reception threshold, air–bone gap, and pure-tone average scores between both techniques showed no significant changes.    Conclusion: Our experience with the palisade cartilage technique demonstrates that subtotal or total perforation at high risk for graft failure can be treated efficiently, and that a durable and resistant reconstruction of the TM with reasonable auditory function can be achieved.