Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-6mz5d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T11:11:13.604Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Staging in cholesteatoma surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

David F. Austin
David F. Austin*
Affiliation:
Chicago
*
Dr. D. F. Austin, M.D., 4811 North Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60630
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Single stage surgery was used for 174 operations for cholesteatoma. The results were analysed using months at risk (actuarial) statistics. The methods of data collection and of creating a life-table for cholesteatoma follow-up are described. Ninety-one canal-down procedures are compared with 82 canal-up procedures as to the recidivism rate as well as hearing results. The actuarial tables showed a 50 per cent cumulative success rate for canal-up procedures versus a 90 per cent rate for canal-down operations. The successful canal-up procedures, however, demonstrated slightly better hearing results. These success rates seemed to be comparable to those using planned staged surgery.

It was concluded that if single stage canal-up procedures were used with larger mastoids and canal-down procedures with smaller mastoids, 80 per cent of patients could be controlled without either residual or recurrent disease appearing. For the others, it was felt safe to wait for the disease to reappear rather than to do planned two-stage procedures for all patients. It was further urged that actuarial statisties be employed when reporting the results of surgery for cholesteatoma.

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 103 , Issue 2 , February 1989 , pp. 143 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1989

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

References

Austin, D. F. (1969) Types and indications of staging. Archives of Otolaryngology, 89: 51–59.Google ScholarPubMed
Austin, D. F. (1977) The significance of the retraction pocket in the treatment of cholesteatoma. In Cholesteatoma, First International Conference (McCabe, B., Sadé, J., Abramson, M., eds), pp. 379–383. Aesculapius, Birmingham, Al.Google Scholar
Austin, D. F. (1985) Reporting results in tympanoplasty. American Journal of Otology, 6: 85–88.Google ScholarPubMed
Beahrs, O. H. and Myers, M. H. (1983) Reporting of cancer survival and end results. In Manual for Staging of Cancer, (Beahrs, O. H. and Myers, M. H. eds), p. 11. J. B. Lippincott, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Cody, D. T. R. and McDonald, T. J. (1984) Mastoidectomy for acquired cholesteatoma: Follow-up to 20 years. Laryngoscope, 94: 1027.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gantz, B. (1988) Personal Communication on Unpublished report to American Otologic Society, Denver, Co.Google Scholar
Holmquist, J. and Lindeman, P. (1981) Mastoid volume and Eustachian tube function in ears with cholesteatoma. In Proceedings of the Sixth Shambaugh Workshop on Otomicrosurgery and Third Shea Fluctuant Hearing Loss Symposium (Shambaugh, G. E., and Shea, J. J. eds.) pp. 354–357. Strode, Huntsville, Al.Google Scholar
Marres, E. H. M. A. (1984) Management of the mastoid—the UDT-System: A new classification in ear surgery. In Proceedings of the International Conference of The Postoperative Evaluation in Middle Ear Surgery, (Marquet, J., ed.), pp. 58–62. Medical Media International, Brussels.Google Scholar
Ragheb, S. M., Gantz, B. J. and McCabe, B. F. (1987) Hearing results after cholesteatoma surgery: The Iowa experience. Laryngoscope, 97: 1254–1263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadé, J. (1977) Postoperative cholesteatoma recurrence. In Cholesteatoma, First International Conference (McCabe, B., Sad-, J. and Abramson, M. eds), pp. 379–389. Aesculapius, Birmingham, Al.Google Scholar
Sadé, J. (1987) Treatment of cholesteatoma. American Journal of Otology, 8: 524–533.Google ScholarPubMed
Sanna, M., Zini, C., Scandellari, R. and Jemmi, G. (1984) Residual and recurrent cholesteatoma in closed tympanoplasty. American Journal of Otology, 5: 277–282.Google ScholarPubMed
Sheehy, J. L. (1978) Residual and recurrent disease in cholesteatoma surgery. Clinical Otolaryngology, 3: 393–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smyth, G. D. L. (1985) Cholesteatoma Surgery: The influence of the canal wall. Laryngoscope, 95: 92–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tos, M. and Lau, T. (1986) Revision tympanoplasty. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 100: 1097–1105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed