Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of Requirements for Staging the Procedure of Reconstruction of Middle Ear After Canal Wall Down Mastoidectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cholesteatoma is a progressive destructive ear disease which can affect any age group. It has been found to be more severe in children and young adults. It erodes the surrounding bone of middle ear, mastoid and ossicles. It causes partial to total deafness, unpleasant smelling discharge, pain, tinnitus, vertigo and facial paralysis. It can even cause meningitis, brain abscess and death. The post-operative outcome of hearing, and the state of the reconstructed middle-ear cavity after concurrent and staged reconstruction of middle ear after canal wall down mastoidectomy was studied in 30 ears with middle-ear cholesteatoma. The reconstructed middle ear was re-aerated in 60.5 % of the cases, which was significantly higher than for the epitympanum (39.5 %). Tympanoplasty was successful in terms of hearing results in 68.9 % of all subjects and in 75.4 % of the ears having a re-aerated tympanic cavity, which was significantly better than the 38.5 % for ears in which the tympanic cavity was not re-aerated. The findings of recurrent cholesteatoma, tympanic atelectasis, and tympanic effusion were observed with significantly (p < 0.03) high incidence in ears with no re-aerated space in their reconstructed mastoid cavities. It was revealed that the post-operative outcome of this surgical technique was significantly related to the state of re-aeration of the reconstructed middle-ear cavity but not with either concurrent or staged reconstruction. Audiological results are same for both concurrent and staged reconstruction following canal wall down tympanomastoidectomy, and hence we reccommend that concurrent reconstruction is preferred in limited disease and staged reconstruction in severe disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Browning G (2008) Scott-Brown’s otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery, vol 3, 7th edn. Hodder Arnold, London, p 3407 (Ch 237C)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chole RA (1999) Ossiculoplasty with banked cartilage. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 27:717–726

  3. Berenholz LP, Rizer FM, Burkey JM, Schuring AG, Lippy WH (2000) Ossiculoplasty in canal wall down mastoidectomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 123:30–33

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ikeda M, Yoshida S, Ikui A, Shigihara S (2003) Canal wall down tympanoplasty with canal reconstruction for middle ear cholesteatoma: post-operative hearing, cholesteatoma recurrence, and status of re-aeration of reconstructed middle ear cavity. J Laryngol Otol 117(4):249–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jahn AF (1989) Cholesteatoma: what is it, how did it get there, and how do we get rid of it? Otolaryngology clin North Am 22(5):847–857

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim HH, Battista RA, Kumar A, Wiet RJ (2006) Should ossicular reconstruction be staged following tympanomastoidectomy. Laryngoscope 116:47–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sasakit T et al (2007) Results of hearing tests after total middle ear reconstruction. Acta Otorhinol 127(5):474–479

    Google Scholar 

  8. O’Reilly RC, Cass SP, Hirsch BE, Kamerer DB, Bernat RA, Poznanovic SP (2005) Ossiculoplasty using incus interposition: hearing results and analysis of the middle ear risk index. Otol Neurotol 26(5):853–858

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Ravishankar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical Approval

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

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ravishankar, C., Datta, R.K. Evaluation of Requirements for Staging the Procedure of Reconstruction of Middle Ear After Canal Wall Down Mastoidectomy. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 69, 155–158 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-016-0990-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-016-0990-4

Keywords

Navigation