{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017657992565055763, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027881040892193307, 'mean_word_length': 5.016759776536313, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Efficacy of middle-ear packing in success of type 1 tympanoplasty: a prospective randomised study

Abstract Objective A prospective randomised study was undertaken to compare the results of type 1 tympanoplasty with and without middle-ear packing with gelfoam. Method Eighty patients undergoing type 1 tympanoplasty were randomised into two groups according to packing in the middle ear: with gelfoam and without gelfoam. The data in terms of graft uptake rate, hearing gain and subjective improvement were analysed at one and three months. Results The graft uptake rate between both groups did not show a statistically significant difference. There was conductive hearing loss in the gelfoam group in the early post-operative period. Subjectively, patients were more comfortable with respect to heaviness and hearing gain than in the non-gelfoam group. Conclusion Gelfoam use in middle-ear packing is not an essential step and causes more discomfort in patients during the early post-operative period. It should be a surgeon's choice to use it when and where it is necessary.