[Mastoid cavity obliteration with allogenic and autologous material]

Surgical obliteration is the treatment of choice for symptomatic mastoid cavities. Various methods and materials are available. Allogeneic material is easily available but can lead to wound infections due to rejection, granulation and inflammatory reactions. Consequently, autologous material is often preferred due to its good biocompatibility. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of patients after mastoid cavity obliteration with allogeneic and autologous material with regard to the occurrence of recurrent cholesteatoma, the number of revision surgeries and the impact of surgery on the health-related quality of life.

Patients who underwent mastoid cavity obliteration with an allogeneic material (hydroxyapatite matrix [HMM]) were retrospectively included in the study. In a prospective part, patients who underwent mastoid cavity obliteration with autologous reconstruction material (AutoM) were included. In addition to a detailed chart review, all patients underwent pure tone audiometry and completed the Zurich Chronic Middle Ear Inventory (ZCMEI-21) at the postoperative examination to assess health-related disease-specific quality of life.

A total of 22 patients with a mean age of 56.9 (SD 18.7 years) receiving HMM (mean follow-up interval: 88.3 months [SD 21.9 months]) and 25 patients with a mean age of 52.4 years (SD 13.7 years) receiving AutoM (mean follow-up interval: 13.5 months [SD 9.5 months]) were included in the study. The revision-free rate for audiological indication after one year was 100% for HMM and 85% for AutoM. The recurrence-free rate at one year was 95% for HMM and 100% for AutoM. 55% of the patients with alloplastic material and 8% of the patients with autologous material required revision surgery due to ear discharge or recurrent cholesteatoma. The groups did not differ in terms of postoperative hearing outcome or postoperative quality of life.

Obliteration of mastoid cavities is a surgical challenge. There was no relevant difference between the materials used in terms of recurrence rate, hearing and health-related quality of life within the 13.5-month observation period of both groups. The lack of subjective symptoms together with the high rate of recurrent cholesteatoma and revision indications emphasises the need for regular clinical follow-up including ear microscopy in chronic middle ear disease and strongly suggests regular follow-up examinations.