Table 3: Univariate analysis of risk factors for unsatisfactory results at 1-year follow-up
Risk factor Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Total p
Number of ears 112 (100) 27 (100) 139 (100) -
Age at surgery (years) 9.8±2.6 9.2±2.8 9.6±2.6 0.31
Age at surgery < 7 years 12 (11) 5 (19) 17 (12) 0.32*
Age at surgery < 8 years 29 (26) 13 (48) 42 (30) 0.02
Age at surgery < 9 years 49 (52) 15 (12) 64 (46) 0.27
Velopalatal cleft 7 (8) 3 (14) 10 (9) 0.41*
Cranio-facial anomaly 13 (9) 3 (5) 16 (8) 1*
External auditory canal stenosis 14 (13) 3 (11) 17 (12) 1*
History of confirmed allergy 22 (25) 5 (24) 27 (25) 0.89
History of contralateral tympanoplasty 13 (12) 3 (12) 16 (12) 1*
History of contralateral ventilation tube 72 (65) 12 (44) 84 (61) 0.05
Large perforation§ 56 (65) 18 (78) 74 (68) 0.23
Anterior or subtotal perforation 55 (50) 17 (268) 72 (53) 0.10
Perioperative inflammation¤ 35 (32) 10 (37) 45 (33) 0.58
Junior surgeon 50 (51) 15 (63) 65 (53) 0.31
Results are shown by Number (percentage). Percentages of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results were calculated using the total number ears with this risk factor as the denominator. Percentages of total number of ears presenting the risk factor were calculated regarding the total number of ears analysed at 1-year follow-up (n=139). Statistically significant results are in bold. all cranio-facial anomalies including velopalatal clefts. tympanoplasty for perforation, retraction pocket or cholesteatoma. § perforation size greater than half the tympanic membrane. ¤ inflammation of the ipsilateral tympanic cavity during surgery including inflammation of the mucosa and/or glue ear. Comparison of continuous values, shown as median [Q1;Q3], using Student t-test. * Data analysed with Fisher’s exact test (other values were analysed with Pearson’s Chi-squared test). Results are shown by Number (percentage). Percentages of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results were calculated using the total number ears with this risk factor as the denominator. Percentages of total number of ears presenting the risk factor were calculated regarding the total number of ears analysed at 1-year follow-up (n=139). Statistically significant results are in bold. all cranio-facial anomalies including velopalatal clefts. tympanoplasty for perforation, retraction pocket or cholesteatoma. § perforation size greater than half the tympanic membrane. ¤ inflammation of the ipsilateral tympanic cavity during surgery including inflammation of the mucosa and/or glue ear. Comparison of continuous values, shown as median [Q1;Q3], using Student t-test. * Data analysed with Fisher’s exact test (other values were analysed with Pearson’s Chi-squared test). Results are shown by Number (percentage). Percentages of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results were calculated using the total number ears with this risk factor as the denominator. Percentages of total number of ears presenting the risk factor were calculated regarding the total number of ears analysed at 1-year follow-up (n=139). Statistically significant results are in bold. all cranio-facial anomalies including velopalatal clefts. tympanoplasty for perforation, retraction pocket or cholesteatoma. § perforation size greater than half the tympanic membrane. ¤ inflammation of the ipsilateral tympanic cavity during surgery including inflammation of the mucosa and/or glue ear. Comparison of continuous values, shown as median [Q1;Q3], using Student t-test. * Data analysed with Fisher’s exact test (other values were analysed with Pearson’s Chi-squared test). Results are shown by Number (percentage). Percentages of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results were calculated using the total number ears with this risk factor as the denominator. Percentages of total number of ears presenting the risk factor were calculated regarding the total number of ears analysed at 1-year follow-up (n=139). Statistically significant results are in bold. all cranio-facial anomalies including velopalatal clefts. tympanoplasty for perforation, retraction pocket or cholesteatoma. § perforation size greater than half the tympanic membrane. ¤ inflammation of the ipsilateral tympanic cavity during surgery including inflammation of the mucosa and/or glue ear. Comparison of continuous values, shown as median [Q1;Q3], using Student t-test. * Data analysed with Fisher’s exact test (other values were analysed with Pearson’s Chi-squared test). Results are shown by Number (percentage). Percentages of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results were calculated using the total number ears with this risk factor as the denominator. Percentages of total number of ears presenting the risk factor were calculated regarding the total number of ears analysed at 1-year follow-up (n=139). Statistically significant results are in bold. all cranio-facial anomalies including velopalatal clefts. tympanoplasty for perforation, retraction pocket or cholesteatoma. § perforation size greater than half the tympanic membrane. ¤ inflammation of the ipsilateral tympanic cavity during surgery including inflammation of the mucosa and/or glue ear. Comparison of continuous values, shown as median [Q1;Q3], using Student t-test. * Data analysed with Fisher’s exact test (other values were analysed with Pearson’s Chi-squared test).