Literature DB >> 19953260

Osteoplastic atticoantrotomy with autologous bone chips and a bony attic strut in cholesteatoma surgery.

Eckard Gehrking1.   

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to determine whether autologous bone chips are suitable materials for canal wall reconstruction after cholesteatoma removal and to evaluate the effectiveness of a separate attic bone graft for the prevention or recurrent cholesteatomas using prospective study of two consecutive patient series (29/31 unselected patients with an average follow-up of 36.3 +/- 11.1/21.5 +/- 6.3 months) and retrograde resection of the posterior-superior canal wall followed by reconstruction of the canal defect using one or more temporal squama bone chips. In the second series, lateral attic wall reconstruction and pars flaccida reinforcement was established by a notched bony attic strut attached onto the neck and short process of the malleus for structural support. In the first series, the rate of recurrent cholesteatomas (17.3%), in particular of attic retraction pockets (31%), was significantly high. The average postoperative air-bone gap was 6.4 +/- 6.3 dB in type-I tympanoplasty (TP), 8.7 +/- 3.4 dB in type-III TP with intact stapes suprastructure, and 16.4 +/- 9.3 dB in type-III TP with TORP, respectively. In the second series, recurrent cholesteatoma and retraction pocket rate could be decreased to 9.7 and 6.5%, respectively. The postoperative air-bone gap was 7.5 +/- 5.1 dB HL in type-I tympanoplasty (TP), 11.6 +/- 4.9 dB HL in type-III (PORP) TP, and 17.9 +/- 12.2 dB HL in type-III (TORP) TP. Connecting the attic strut to the malleus neck did not affect the malleus mobility and hearing outcome. Osteoplastic atticoantrotomy with autologous bone chip reconstruction enables a tailor-made anatomical and physiological reconstitution of the auditory ear canal, thus enhancing the acoustic properties. Precise reconstruction of the lateral attic wall and reinforcement of the superior part of the tympanic membrane seems to be important for the prevention of retraction pockets and subsequent recurrent cholesteatoma development.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19953260     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-009-1171-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  40 in total

1.  [The acoustics of the open mastoid cavity (so-called "radical cavity") and its modification by surgical measures. II. Clinical studies].

Authors:  J Hartwein
Journal:  Laryngorhinootologie       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 1.057

2.  [Osteoplastic meato-mastoidectomy, tongue and groove technique with reciprocating microsaw for temporal removal of posterior and superior canal segment (author's transl)].

Authors:  H Feldmann
Journal:  Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg)       Date:  1977-09

3.  A new procedure for bone reconstruction in oto-microsurgery: a mixture of bone dust and fibrinogen adhesive.

Authors:  M C Gersdorff; T A Robillard
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  Single-stage surgery for cholesteatoma: an actuarial analysis.

Authors:  D F Austin
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1989-11

5.  Surgical treatment of cholesteatoma: the role of staging in closed operations.

Authors:  G D Smyth
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  1988 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.547

6.  Reconstruction of middle ear with old radical cavity.

Authors:  J Szpunar
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1973-11       Impact factor: 1.494

7.  Mastoid and epitympanic obliteration in canal wall up mastoidectomy for prevention of retraction pocket.

Authors:  Won Sang Lee; Jae Young Choi; Mee Hyun Song; Eun Jin Son; Sang Ho Jung; Sung Huhn Kim
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 8.  Mechanical and acoustic analysis of middle ear reconstruction.

Authors:  J J Rosowski; S N Merchant
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1995-07

9.  [Reconstruction of the auditory canal wall with bone chips from the temporal squama--preliminary results].

Authors:  E Gehrking; B Wollenberg; H Frenzel
Journal:  Laryngorhinootologie       Date:  2007-01-30       Impact factor: 1.057

Review 10.  Treatment of cholesteatoma and retraction pockets.

Authors:  J Sadé
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.503

View more
  5 in total

1.  Hearing outcome after sequential cholesteatoma surgery.

Authors:  Susen Lailach; Thomas Zahnert; Nikoloz Lasurashvili; Max Kemper; Thomas Beleites; Marcus Neudert
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  PORP vs. TORP: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Huiqian Yu; Yingzi He; Yusu Ni; Yunfeng Wang; Na Lu; Huawei Li
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Retrograde mastoidectomy with canal wall reconstruction versus intact canal wall tympanomastoidectomy for cholesteatoma with minimal mastoid extension.

Authors:  Masaomi Motegi; Yutaka Yamamoto; Taisuke Akutsu; Takahiro Nakajima; Masahiro Takahashi; Sayaka Sampei; Kazuhisa Yamamoto; Tomokatsu Udagawa; Yuika Sakurai; Hiromi Kojima
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 3.236

4.  Clinical Analysis of 85 Cases of External Auditory Canal Cholesteatoma Surgery under Specialized Endoscopy.

Authors:  Yanan Guo; Minfei Qian; Jiping Li; Ji Xu; Hao Chen; Hua Zhang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-10-05       Impact factor: 3.246

5.  Platelet-Rich Plasma in Reconstruction of Posterior Meatal Wall after Canal Wall Down Mastoidectomy.

Authors:  Mohammad El-Sayed Abd Elbary; Wail Fayez Nasr; Samir Sorour Sorour
Journal:  Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-05-17
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.