OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of bone pâté versus bioactive glass in mastoid obliteration. METHOD: This randomised parallel groups study was conducted at a tertiary care centre between September 2017 and August 2019. Sixty-eight patients, 33 males and 35 females, aged 12-56 years, randomly underwent single-stage canal wall down mastoidectomy with mastoid obliteration using either bone pâté (n = 35) or bioactive glass (n = 33), and were evaluated 12 months after the operation. RESULTS: A dry epithelised cavity (Merchant's grade 0 or 1) was achieved in 65 patients (95.59 per cent). Three patients (4.41 per cent) showed recidivism. The mean air-bone gap decreased to 16.80 ± 4.23 dB from 35.10 ± 5.21 dB pre-operatively. The mean Glasgow Benefit Inventory score was 30.02 ± 8.23. There was no significant difference between the two groups in these outcomes. However, the duration of surgery was shorter in the bioactive glass group (156.87 ± 7.83 vs 162.28 ± 8.74 minutes; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: The efficacy of both materials was comparable.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of bone pâté versus bioactive glass in mastoid obliteration. METHOD: This randomised parallel groups study was conducted at a tertiary care centre between September 2017 and August 2019. Sixty-eight patients, 33 males and 35 females, aged 12-56 years, randomly underwent single-stage canal wall down mastoidectomy with mastoid obliteration using either bone pâté (n = 35) or bioactive glass (n = 33), and were evaluated 12 months after the operation. RESULTS: A dry epithelised cavity (Merchant's grade 0 or 1) was achieved in 65 patients (95.59 per cent). Three patients (4.41 per cent) showed recidivism. The mean air-bone gap decreased to 16.80 ± 4.23 dB from 35.10 ± 5.21 dB pre-operatively. The mean Glasgow Benefit Inventory score was 30.02 ± 8.23. There was no significant difference between the two groups in these outcomes. However, the duration of surgery was shorter in the bioactive glass group (156.87 ± 7.83 vs 162.28 ± 8.74 minutes; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: The efficacy of both materials was comparable.
Authors: Jantine J Lindeboom; P M W van Kempen; J Buwalda; B O Westerlaken; D A van Zuijlen; S J H Bom; F B van der Beek Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 3.236