Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-76mfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T10:57:50.335Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reduction of cicatricial stenosis after canalplasty for auditory exostoses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2019

X M Rojas ,
M M Bailón  and
C F González
X M Rojas*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
M M Bailón
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
C F González
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Xenia Mota Rojas, Department of Otolaryngology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago, Travesa da Choupana (s/n), 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain E-mail: mota.xenia@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Canalplasty for auditory exostoses is reserved for symptomatic patients. This study reviewed the outcomes of our technique regarding cicatricial stenosis.

Method

A chart review was conducted on patients undergoing canalplasty for auditory exostoses between 2002 and 2017. The surgical technique is described.

Results

The study comprised 43 adults (50 operated ears). Exostoses were bilateral in 40 cases (94 per cent) and occlusive in 33 (66 per cent). After drilling, the external auditory meatus was covered with a graft in 34 cases (68 per cent) and a silicone sheet was used in 32 (64 per cent). Cicatricial stenosis appeared in eight cases (16 per cent). Skin grafts were not used in six of these eight cases (p < 0.04), and silicone sheets were used only in one of these eight (p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Canalplasty is challenging because of its potential complications. Our data showed that the use of skin grafts and silicone sheets to cover the bared external auditory meatus was associated with a lower rate of cicatricial stenosis.

Keywords

ExostosesExternal Auditory MeatusStenosisTreatment Outcome

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 133 , Issue 9 , September 2019 , pp. 814 - 817
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Dr X M Rojas takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

1Grinblat, G, Prasad, SC, Piras, G, He, J, Taibah, A, Russo, A et al. Outcomes of drill canalplasty in exostoses and osteoma: analysis of 256 cases and literature review. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:1565–72Google Scholar
2Sanna, M, Russo, A, Khrais, T, Jain, Y, Augurio, M. Canalplasty for severe external auditory meatus exostoses. J Laryngol Otol 2004;118:607–11Google Scholar
3Okumura, MM, Boyadjian, CH, Eggers, S. An evaluation of auditory exostoses in 621 prehistoric human skulls from coastal Brazil. Ear Nose Throat J 2007;86:468–72Google Scholar
4DiBartolomeo, JR. Exostoses of the external auditory canal. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1979;88:2–20Google Scholar
5González Reimers, E, Lorenzo de la Peña, L, Sarmiento-Herrera, R, Pérez Piñeiro, B, Arnay de la Rosa, M. Ear exostoses: a past and present lesion [in Spanish]. Rev Esp Enferm Metab Oseas 2008;17:112–13Google Scholar
6Alexander, V, Lau, A, Beaumont, E, Hope, A. The effects of surfing behaviour on the development of external auditory canal exostosis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015;272:1643–9Google Scholar
7Van Gilse, PHG. Subsequent observations on the genesis of external auditory canal exostoses by cold water irritation [in French]. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1938;26:343–52Google Scholar
8King, JF, Kinney, AC, Iacobellis, SF, Alexander, TH, Harris, JP, Torre, P et al. Laterality of exostosis in surfers due to evaporative cooling effect. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:345–51Google Scholar
9Altuna Mariezkurrena, X, Vea Orte, JC, Camacho Arrioaga, JJ, Algaba Guimerá, J. Surgical treatment of exostosis in the external auditory canal [in Spanish]. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2006;57:257–61Google Scholar
10Hutchinson, DL, Denise, CB, Daniel, HJ, Kalmus, GW. A reevaluation of the cold water etiology of external auditory exostoses. Am J Phys Anthropol 1997;103:417–22Google Scholar
11House, JW, Wilkinson, EP. External auditory exostoses: evaluation and treatment. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;138:672–8Google Scholar
12Hetzler, DG. Osteotome technique for removal of symptomatic ear canal exostoses. Laryngoscope 2007;117(1 Pt 2 suppl 113):1–14Google Scholar
13Fisher, EW, McManus, TC. Surgery for external auditory canal exostoses and osteomata. J Laryngol Otol 1994;108:106–10Google Scholar
14Puttasiddaiah, PM, Browning, ST. Removal of external ear canal exostoses by piezo surgery: a novel technique. J Laryngol Otol 2018;132:840–1Google Scholar
15Barrett, G, Ronan, N, Cowan, E, Flanagan, P. To drill or to chisel? A long-term follow-up study of 92 exostectomy procedures in the UK. Laryngoscope 2015;125:453–6Google Scholar
16Mudry, A, Hetzler, D. Birth and evolution of chiselling and drilling techniques for removing ear canal exostoses. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:109–14Google Scholar
17Longridge, NS. Exostosis of the external auditory canal: a technical note. Otol Neurotol 2002;23:260–1Google Scholar