1. Topical fibroblast growth factor‐2 for treatment of chronic tympanic membrane perforations
- Author
-
Felipe Santos, Edina Shu, Daniel J. Lee, David H. Jung, Alicia M. Quesnel, Konstantina M. Stankovic, Dunia E. Abdul‐Aziz, Camden P. Bay, Amy Quinkert, and D. Bradley Welling
- Subjects
basic FGF ,bFGF ,chronic tympanic membrane perforation ,FGF2 ,fibroblast growth factor ,growth factor ,Otorhinolaryngology ,RF1-547 ,Surgery ,RD1-811 - Abstract
Abstract Objective To determine the efficacy of fibroblast growth factor‐2 (FGF‐2) in treating chronic nonhealing tympanic membrane (TM) perforations. Method Double‐blinded, randomized placebo controlled phase 2 clinical trial for patients with chronic TM perforations of more than 3 months duration with a cross‐over arm. Patients received either FGF‐2 or placebo (sterile water) saturated gelatin sponge in the perforation after rimming the perforation under topical anesthesia. The perforation was then covered with Tisseel fibrin glue. The primary endpoint was complete closure of the TM perforation. Secondary end points included change in hearing and partial TM closure rates. The TM was examined every 3 weeks with otoendoscopy for closure. The treatment was repeated if there was incomplete closure every 3 weeks up to a total of three treatments per arm. Results Seventy four patients were recruited for the study. Fifty seven met eligibility criteria and fifty four completed the study. Ten of 14 perforations closed completely in the placebo group (71.4%) and 23 of 40 perforations closed completely in the FGF‐2 treatment group (57.5%), P value = .36. Pure tone averages and word recognition scores were not statistically significantly different between study groups post‐treatment. After initial complete closure, re‐perforation occurred in seven FGF‐2 treated patients and two placebo patients making the effective final closure rate 40% for FGF and 57% for placebo, respectively. Conclusion No statistically significant difference in tympanic membrane perforation closure rate was found between the FGF‐2 and placebo groups. There were no differences in hearing outcomes between the groups. Level of evidence 1b.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF