PubMed1983
The traditional objectives of tympanoplasty are infection control, closure of the ear by grafting techniques, and hearing rehabilitation via ossicular reconstruction. The multiplicity of contemporary prostheses and surgical options available would seem to underscore the magnitude of the ossicular reconstruction problem in the difficult chronic ear relative to all else. The success of stapedectomy has led to great expectations for all problems of ossicular reconstruction. The circumstances of the chronic ear is a milieu hostile in comparison and precludes any such comparison. Multiple sites of ossicular pathology, variations in mucosa health, inconsistent middle ear aeration and the overall complexity of the chronic ear present the otologist with a physiodynamic problem the solution of which is far from simplistic. The TORP and PORP have been enthusiastically endorsed in this regard, as a very suitable answer. Such enthusiasm, however, has been largely derived from data accumulated in the short term, often in less than a year's follow-up. This report reviews the authors' results in 141 patients in whom 86 TORPs and 55 PORPs were employed. For comparison, hearing data in 276 ears in which the fitted incus prosthesis, the authors' preferred reconstruction format, was used. Success for TORP reconstruction was assessed as air-bone gap closure to within 30 dB and for PORP, to within 20 dB. This was accomplished in 85% and 49% respectively. Extrusion rate, overall, was 10%. Relative advantages and disadvantages of the TORP and PORP are discussed and serve as a basis for the decision to continue to use this method of ossicular reconstruction. This data is put into perspective in acknowledging that the TORP and PORP are not the ultimate solution to this problem. When employed in combination with newer techniques in cartilage tympanoplasty, further improvement is expectant.