Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A new theory interprets the development of a retraction pocket as a natural self-healing process

  • Otology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The thesis that cholesteatoma evolves from a retraction pocket is widely accepted today. Yet, its prime etiology, the question of what triggers the invagination of healthy skin, still remains unclear despite centuries of investigations into the origin of cholesteatoma. A new idea interprets the horizontal migration of skin into the middle ear cavities as a self-healing process, curing an underlying inflammation in the tympanic cavity, through the overgrowth and contact with immunologically active tissue.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the interrelation of retraction pockets and underlying granulation tissue was conducted in 209 second-look cholesteatoma surgeries over the last decade.

Results

A stable tympanic membrane over aerated, healthy middle ear mucosa was found in 71.3% of cases. In 11%, small retractions with air in other parts of the middle ear cleft (epitympanic, sinus or anterior mesotympanum) were described. In 6.2%, granulations under a retraction were found. Only 3.8% of the reports revealed air behind a retraction or did not provide enough information on the mucosa situation behind the drum membrane.

Conclusions

A new hypothesis interprets the origin of a retraction pocket—the precursor of a cholesteatoma—as a natural attempt by the body to cure an underlying inflammation in a cavity. Analogous phenomena exist, e.g. the migration of the omentum towards a local inflammation in the abdomen. This idea, which is supported by the findings in our 209 second-look surgeries, is the first explanation of the origin of retraction pockets that is compatible with the various characteristics of original or recurrent cholesteatoma. A prophylaxis against a recurrent cholesteatoma might be attained by securing free drainage of the mucosa into the tubal orifice with the use of thin silicone foils in an attempt to prevent any granulation in the middle ear cleft, similar to the principles of modern rhinosinusoidal surgery with its emphasis on unblocked mucosa clearance. This allows gas production in the healed middle ear mucosa to recover, reducing the risk of a recurrent retraction.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kuo CL (2014) Etiopathogenesis of acquired cholesteatoma: prominent theories and recent advances in biomolecular research. Laryngoscope 125:234–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Soldati D, Mudry A (2001) Knowledge about cholesteatoma, from the first description to the modern histopathology. Otol Neurotol 22:723–730

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jackler RK, Santa Maria PL, Varsak YK, Nguyen A, Blevins NH (2015) A new theory on the pathogenesis of acquired cholesteatoma: mucosal traction. Laryngoscope 125(Suppl. 4):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tos M (1981) Upon the relationship between secretory otitis in childhood and chronic otitis and its sequelae in adults. J Laryngol Otol 95:1011–1022

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Habermann J (1898) Zur Entstehung des Cholesteatoms des Mittelohres. Arch Ohrenheilkunde 27:42–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gruber J (1888) Das Cholesteatom (Perlgeschwulst). Lehrbuch der Ohrenheilkunde. Berlin. C. Geralds Sohn

  7. Michaels L (1986) An epidermoid formation in the developing middle ear: possible source of cholesteatoma. J Otolaryngol 15:169–174

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Escher F (1979) Die Therapie des Mittelohrcholesteatoms. HNO 27:145–149

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Steinbach E, Pusalkar A, Heumann H (1988) Cholesteatoma—pathology and treatment. Adv Oto-Rhino-Laryngol 39:94–106

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Karmody CS, Northrop C (2011) The pathogenesis of acquired cholesteatoma of the human middle ear: support for the migration hypothesis. Otol Neurotol 33:42–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sudhoff H, Tos M (2007) Pathogenesis of sinus cholesteatoma. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol 264:137–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Deong KK, Prepageran N, Raman R (2006) Epithelial migration of the postmyringoplasty tympanic membrane. Otol Neurotol 27:855–858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tos M (1988) Incidence, etiology and pathogenesis of cholesteatoma in children. Adv Oto-Rhino-Laryngol 40:110–117

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Wayoff M, Charachon R, Roulleau P, Lacher G, Deguine C (1987) Surgical treatment of middle ear cholesteatoma. In: Advances in Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, vol 36. Karger, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tos M, Lau T (1988) Attic cholesteatoma. Recurrence rate related to observation time. Am J Otol 9:456–464

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Louw L (2010) Acquired cholesteatoma pathogenesis: stepwise explanations. J Laryngol Otol 124:587–593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hüttenbrink KB (1984) Die chronische Otitis media. In: Nauman H, Helms J, Herberhold C, Kastenbauer E (eds) Oto Rhino Laryngologie in Klinik und Praxis, Band 1 Ohr, G. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 601–632

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bezold F (1891) Über das Cholesteatom des Mittelohres. Z Ohrenheilkunde. 21:252–271

  19. Marchioni D, Alicandri-Ciufelli M, Molteni G, Artioli FL, Genovese E, Presutti L (2010) Selective epitympanic dysventilation syndrome. Laryngoscope 120:1028–1033

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Morimitsu T, Nagay T, Nagay M, Ide M, Makino K, Tono T (1989) Long term results of anterior tympanotomy for cholesteatoma. In: Tos M, Thomssen J, Peitersen E (eds) Cholesteatoma and mastoid surgery. Kugler, Amsterdam, pp 875–880

    Google Scholar 

  21. Meyerhoff WL, Wright CG, Gerken GM (1990) Effects of middle ear ventilation on cholesteatoma development in experimental animals. Acta Otolaryngol 110:279–285

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Tos M, Stangerup SE, Holm-Jensen S, Sørensen CH (1984) Spontaneous course of secretory otitis and changes of the eardrum. Arch Otolaryngol 110:281–289

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Spilsbury K, Ha JF, Semmens JB, Lannigan F (2013) Cholesteatoma in cleft lip and palate: a populations-based follow-up study of children after ventilation tubes. Laryngoscope 123:2024–2029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Heumann A, Steinbach E, Koneberg F (1981) Untersuchung zur Cholesteatomentstehung durch Verschluss der Tube bei Kaninchen. Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol 231:813–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Buckingham RA (1988) Patent eustachian tube in the underaerated middle ear: a paradox. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 97:219–221

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sadé J, Luntz M, Levy D (1995) Middle ear gas composition and middle ear aeration. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 104:369–373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gaihede M, Dirckx JJ, Jacobsen H, Aernouts J, Sovso M, Tveteras K (2010) Middle ear pressure regulation-complementary active actions of the mastoid and the Eustachian tube. Otol Neurotol 31:603–611

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wullstein HL, Wullstein SR (1980) Cholesteatoma. Etiology, nosology and tympanoplasty. J Otorhinolaryngol 42:313–335

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Chole RA, Lim DJ (2015) In reference to a new theory on the pathogenesis of acquired cholesteatoma: mucosal traction. Laryngoscope 126:E129–E130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kuo CL (2016) Letter to the editor in reference to a new theory on the pathogenesis of acquired cholesteatoma: mucosal traction. Laryngoscope 126:E132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Yeger H, Minaker E, Charles D, Rubin A, Sturgess JM (1988) Abnormalities of cilia in the middle ear in chronic otitis media. Ann Otol 97:180–191

    Google Scholar 

  32. Schwartz M (1984) Die genetischen Faktoren des Mittelohrcholesteatoms. HNO 32:59–60

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ruedi L (1978) Pathogenesis and surgical treatment of the middle ear cholesteatoma. Acta Otolaryngol 361(Suppl):1–45

    Google Scholar 

  34. Beutner D, Helmstaedter V, Stumpf R, Beleites D, Zahnert T, Lüers JC, Hüttenbrink KB (2010) Impact of partial mastoid obliteration on caloric vestibular function in canal wall down mastoidectomy. Otol Neurotol 31:1399–1403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Vercruysse JP, van Dinther JJ, De Foer B, Casselman J, Somers T, Cremers CC, Offeciers E (2016) Long-term results of troublesome CWD cavity reconstruction by mastoid and epitympanic bony obliteration (CWR-BOT) in adults. Otol Neurotol 37:698–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kaufmann E, Staemmler M (1956) Lehrbuch der speziellen pathologischen Anatomie. Band 1; 1. Hälfte. De Gruiter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  37. Rost F (1925) Pathologische Physiologie des Chirurgen. F.C.W. Vogel, Leipzig 3. Aufl. 1925

  38. Beutner D, Hüttenbrink KB, Stumpf R, Beleites D, Zahnert T, Lüers JC, Helmstaedter V (2010) Cartilage plate tympanoplasty. Otol Neurotol 31:105–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Shields TW (2009) General thoracic surgery, 7th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  40. Veldman JE (1985) The Langerhans’ T cell microenvironment in aural cholesteatoma. Kugler, Amsterdam, pp 69–79

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hüttenbrink KB (2018) Eingriffe am Ohr. In: Rettinger G, Werner JA, Hosemann W, Hüttenbrink KB (eds) HNO-Operationslehre. Thieme, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  42. Shimada T, Lim DJ (1972) Distribution of ciliated cells in the human middle ear. Electron and light microscopic observations. Ann Otol-Rhinol-Laryngol 81:203–211

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Lund V (2002) The evolution of surgery on the maxillary sinus for chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope 112:415–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Elliott KA, Stringer SP (2006) Evidence based recommendations for antimicrobial nasal washes in chronic rhinosinusitis. Am J Rhinol 20:1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Takahashi H (2012) The middle ear. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No support or funding was received for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of ORL, University Clinic Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany

    Karl-Bernd Hüttenbrink

Authors
  1. Karl-Bernd Hüttenbrink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karl-Bernd Hüttenbrink.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hüttenbrink, KB. A new theory interprets the development of a retraction pocket as a natural self-healing process. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 276, 367–373 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-5246-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-5246-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation