Endoscopic ossiculoplasty: Is there any edge over the microscopic technique?

Objectives/Hypothesis To compare endoscopic ossiculoplasty with conventional microscopic technique in terms of postoperative hearing outcomes and complications. Study Design Randomized controlled trial. Methods One hundred eighteen patients diagnosed with ossicular chain discontinuity were randomly assigned into two groups, one undergoing endoscopic ossiculoplasty and the other undergoing ossiculoplasty by the microscopic technique, with the operating surgeon being same for both groups. The two groups were compared in terms of operative time, postoperative air-bone gap, mean air-bone gap closure, and incidence of complications. Teflon prostheses (partial ossicular chain replacement prosthesis [PORP] and total ossicular chain replacement prosthesis [TORP]) were used for reconstruction in all cases. Results Endoscopic ossiculoplasty with PORP rendered a statistically significant mean postoperative air-bone gap and air-bone gap closure at 1 month when compared to that of microscopic PORP ossiculoplasty. However, there was no significant difference between the two techniques in terms of mean postoperative air-bone gap and air-bone gap closure at 3 and 6 months. In the TORP ossiculoplasty cases, there was no significant difference in mean postoperative air-bone gap and air-bone gap closure at 1, 3, and 6 months. In terms of operative time and incidence of complications, no statistical significance was found between the two groups. Conclusions Endoscopic ossiculoplasty appears to provide superior visualization and better early audiological outcome (in PORP ossiculoplasty cases) when compared to microscopic technique. However, long-term audiological outcomes and incidence of complications remain comparable. Level of Evidence 1 Laryngoscope, 130:797-802, 2020