Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Evaluation of mastoid obliteration surgery.

Authors: T, Minatogawa; H, Machizuka; T, Kumoi;

Evaluation of mastoid obliteration surgery.

Abstract

The anatomic results of mastoid obliteration surgery on 54 ears during the past 10 years were analyzed, and the comparative utility of several materials for obliteration was evaluated. Thirty-three ears had primary chronic otitis media with or without cholesteatoma (group 1), and 21 ears had old open mastoid with intractable chronic discharge due to incomplete epithelialization (group 2). The materials used for obliteration were biologic (pedicled muscle flap, autogenous bone chips, tragal cartilage with perichondrium, allograft dura), nonbiologic (hydroxyapatite), or a combination of two of these materials. Evaluation at 2 months postoperatively showed that 42 ears were anatomically complete, whereas the other 12 ears were incomplete: three cases in group 1 and nine cases in group 2. The main causes of these unsatisfactory results were exposure of transplanted artificial material or partial loss of the pedicled muscle flap. In the long-term follow-up results, four ears were evaluated as unsatisfactory in group 1, and six ears in group 2, owing to shrinkage of obliterated tissue. The major causes of failure were anatomic incompleteness following surgery for old open mastoid cavity, in which the use of biologic materials for obliteration was much safer than nonbiologic material, and from the protrusion of artificial materials used.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Otitis Media, Treatment Outcome, Humans, Transplantation, Homologous, Biocompatible Materials, Cholesteatoma, Mastoid, Surgical Flaps, Follow-Up Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    19
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
19
Average
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!