Five-year postoperative outcomes of modified staged canal wall up tympanoplasty for primary acquired cholesteatoma
- 160 Downloads
For successful canal wall up tympanoplasty (CWUT) for the treatment of cholesteatoma, the restoration of stable middle ear aeration is also important; however, little is known about the dynamics of such aeration or the optimal surgical procedure. In this study, alternative additional surgical procedure was selected based on the grade of middle ear aeration during the second-stage operation.
Subjects and methods
Patients included in this study underwent staged CWUT surgeries with mastoid cortex plasty (MCP) for well-aerated ears (grade 3) and bony mastoid obliteration (BMO) for poorly aerated ears (grade 2–0). Of the 115 ears included in this study, 62 were followed for more than 5 years. Recurrence rates with deep retraction pocket formation were assessed using the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. The aeration was graded as: 0, no aeration; 1, aeration of only the mesotympanum; 2, aeration of the entire tympanic cavity; and 3, aeration of both the tympanic and mastoid cavities.
No recurrence was observed in ears associated with grade 3 aeration that underwent MCP or in ears with grade 2 aeration that underwent BMO during second-stage surgery. For grades 0 and 1 aeration ears, the recurrence rates were 8.1% after 5 years and 12.5% after 10 years (p < 0.05), and the aeration of recurrent ears deteriorated to grade 0.
Aeration during second-stage surgery predicts the final outcome.
KeywordsStaged tympanoplasty Intact canal wall up tympanoplasty Computed tomography Middle ear aeration level
There was no financial and material support for this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 6.Robinson JM (1988) Repair of the outer attic wall in closed cavity mastoidectomy. In: Babighian G, Veldman JE, Portmann M et al. (eds) Transplants and implants in otology. Kugler and Gheddini Publications, Amsterdam, pp 173–174Google Scholar
- 9.Tos M (1995) 6. Classic intact canal wall mastoidectomy. In: Tos M (eds) Manual of middle ear surgery; vol 2 mastoid surgery and reconstructive procedures. Thieme, New York, pp 106–155Google Scholar
- 10.Tos M (1995) Part II reconstruction. In: Tos M (eds) Manual of middle ear surgery; vol 2 mastoid surgery and reconstructive procedures. Thieme, New York, pp 285–416Google Scholar
- 21.Hashimoto K, Yanagihara N, Hyodo J, Sakagami M (2015) Osseous eustachian tube and peritubal cells in patients with unilateral cholesteatoma comparison between healthy and diseased sides using high-resolution cone-beam computed tomography. Otol Neurotol 36:776–781. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000000711 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Haginomori S, Takamaki A, Nonaka R, Mineharu A, Kanazawa A, Takenaka H (2009) Postoperative aeration in the middle ear and hearing outcome after canal wall down tympanoplasty with soft-wall reconstruction for cholesteatoma. Otol Neurotol 30:478–483. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e31819e634a CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar