OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ossicular reconstruction (OCR) performed concurrent with tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma results in significantly different hearing results when compared to OCR performed in a separate, staged procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study subjects were patients undergoing OCR within a 2-year period. Intervention was OCR concurrent with tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma (group 1) or staged following tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma (group 2). Main outcome measures were mean postoperative air-bone gap (ABG), proportion achieving ABG closure to <20 dB and <30 dB for group 1 and group 2 overall and when controlling for type of mastoid cavity created (open or closed) and the status of the stapes suprastructure (TORP vs. PORP OCR). RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were identified. Forty underwent OCR concurrent with tympanomastoidectomy and 43 underwent a staged OCR after tympanomastoidectomy. Overall, similar hearing results were seen in the two groups. When considering the status of the stapes and mastoid cavity, concurrent OCR resulted in improved mean postoperative ABG in a closed mastoid cavity with an intact stapes suprastructure (P = .024). Furthermore, a greater proportion of patients who had concurrent OCR within this group achieved ABG <20 dB and ABG <30 dB, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .092 and P = .078, respectively). By contrast, staged OCR resulted in improved mean postoperative ABG and ABG <30 dB in open mastoid cavities with an absent stapes suprastructure (P = .040, and P = .019, respectively). Similarly, a greater proportion achieved ABG <20 dB, approaching statistical significance (P = .055). CONCLUSIONS: Staged OCR is advantageous in those with most severe disease, whereas those with least severe disease may benefit from a concurrent OCR.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ossicular reconstruction (OCR) performed concurrent with tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma results in significantly different hearing results when compared to OCR performed in a separate, staged procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study subjects were patients undergoing OCR within a 2-year period. Intervention was OCR concurrent with tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma (group 1) or staged following tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma (group 2). Main outcome measures were mean postoperative air-bone gap (ABG), proportion achieving ABG closure to <20 dB and <30 dB for group 1 and group 2 overall and when controlling for type of mastoid cavity created (open or closed) and the status of the stapes suprastructure (TORP vs. PORP OCR). RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were identified. Forty underwent OCR concurrent with tympanomastoidectomy and 43 underwent a staged OCR after tympanomastoidectomy. Overall, similar hearing results were seen in the two groups. When considering the status of the stapes and mastoid cavity, concurrent OCR resulted in improved mean postoperative ABG in a closed mastoid cavity with an intact stapes suprastructure (P = .024). Furthermore, a greater proportion of patients who had concurrent OCR within this group achieved ABG <20 dB and ABG <30 dB, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = .092 and P = .078, respectively). By contrast, staged OCR resulted in improved mean postoperative ABG and ABG <30 dB in open mastoid cavities with an absent stapes suprastructure (P = .040, and P = .019, respectively). Similarly, a greater proportion achieved ABG <20 dB, approaching statistical significance (P = .055). CONCLUSIONS: Staged OCR is advantageous in those with most severe disease, whereas those with least severe disease may benefit from a concurrent OCR.