Dry versus wet temporalis fascia graft in type-I tympanoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy of dry versus wet temporalis fascia graft among patients undergoing type-I tympanoplasty.

Methods: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases were screened from inception until July 2022. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of included RCTs. The outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model.

Results: Eight RCTs with 989 patients (dry group = 514 and wet group = 475) were included. The overall quality was 'low', 'some concerns', and 'high' risk of bias in five, two, and one RCT(s), respectively. There were no significant differences between both groups regarding the surgical success rate (n = 8 RCTs, RR 0.99, 95% CI [0.95, 1.03], p = 0.6), audiological success rate (n = 5 RCTs, RR = 0.93, 95% CI [0.73, 1.13], p = 0.48), mean difference in pure tone average (n = 2 RCTs, MD = 2.73 Hz, 95% CI [- 2.31, 7.77], p = 0.29), and mean difference in graft placement time (n = 3 RCTs, MD = - 2.18 min, 95% CI [- 5.11, 0.76], p = 0.15). However, the mean difference in operative time was significantly lower in favor of the wet compared with the dry temporalis fascia group (n = 2 RCTs, MD = 2.95 min, 95% CI [- 1.80, 4.11], p < 0.001). The surgical success rate was not significantly different between both groups according to the tympanic membrane perforation size and site.

Conclusions: The type of temporalis fascia graft (dry or wet) did not influence the clinical outcomes of type-I tympanoplasty.

Keywords: Audiological success rate; Dry graft; Surgical success rate; Temporalis fascia graft; Tympanoplasty; Wet graft.