Abdelrahman E M Ezzat1, Marwa M El-Begermy2, Ahmed M A Mahmoud3, Mustafa I Eid1. 1. ENT Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt. 2. ENT Department, Faculty of Medicine, Ain-Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. 3. Audiology Unit, ENT Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Indications for removal of mastoid air cells and obliterating the mastoid cavity vary considerably from surgeon to surgeon. Various obliteration techniques have been recommended to eliminate open cavity problems. Here we investigated the difference between natural and synthetic filling materials to improve hearing after obliteration of the mastoid cavity. SETTING: Academic tertiary care medical centers (Al-Azhar and Ain-Shams University Hospitals). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study included 60 patients divided into 2 equal groups. METHODS: The study was conducted over 6 years from 2008-14. The mean follow-up time was 3.5 years. RESULTS: We found that serviceable hearing (≤30 dB) was obtained after surgery in 52 patients (86.6%). In cases where natural materials were used in reconstruction, the average gain in AC was 25.5 dB and in BC it was 1.1 dB, while in cases where synthetic materials were used the average gain in AC was 26 dB and in BC it was 0.5 dB. There was significant improvement in the mean postoperative AC compared to the mean preoperative AC. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the use of natural and synthetic materials in improving postoperative hearing. CONCLUSIONS: Both natural and synthetic materials help in improvement of hearing after obliteration of the mastoid cavity. There is no statistically significant difference between the materials.
BACKGROUND: Indications for removal of mastoid air cells and obliterating the mastoid cavity vary considerably from surgeon to surgeon. Various obliteration techniques have been recommended to eliminate open cavity problems. Here we investigated the difference between natural and synthetic filling materials to improve hearing after obliteration of the mastoid cavity. SETTING: Academic tertiary care medical centers (Al-Azhar and Ain-Shams University Hospitals). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study included 60 patients divided into 2 equal groups. METHODS: The study was conducted over 6 years from 2008-14. The mean follow-up time was 3.5 years. RESULTS: We found that serviceable hearing (≤30 dB) was obtained after surgery in 52 patients (86.6%). In cases where natural materials were used in reconstruction, the average gain in AC was 25.5 dB and in BC it was 1.1 dB, while in cases where synthetic materials were used the average gain in AC was 26 dB and in BC it was 0.5 dB. There was significant improvement in the mean postoperative AC compared to the mean preoperative AC. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the use of natural and synthetic materials in improving postoperative hearing. CONCLUSIONS: Both natural and synthetic materials help in improvement of hearing after obliteration of the mastoid cavity. There is no statistically significant difference between the materials.