ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of hydroxyapatite vs. bone pâté as obliteration material in mastoidectomy surgery for patients with chronic suppurative otitis media and cholesteatoma. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multi-center, cohort study. All patients were followed up with micro-otoscopy, audiometry, and, if indicated, MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging. The following outcome parameters were analyzed: procedure safety (wound infections and complications), cholesteatoma recidivism rates (residual/recurrent), control of infection (Merchant's scale), and hearing results (pure-tone averages at 500/1000/2000/4000 Hz). RESULTS: Eighty-three cases were included: 45 obliterated with hydroxyapatite and 38 with bone pâté, with a mean follow-up time of, respectively, 25 and 24 months. Wound infections were only detected in the bone pâté group (4.8%) and successfully treated with oral or intravenous antibiotics and surgical drainage (p = 0.026). No other major surgical complications were observed in both groups. Cholesteatoma recidivism was observed in 15% using hydroxyapatite and 12% using bone pâté (p = 0.471). Complete control of infection (Merchant 0) was achieved in 76.2% using bone pâté and 86.8% using hydroxyapatite at 12 months postoperatively (p = 0.223). All patients showed good postoperative healing without complete failure to manage infection (Merchant 3). Pre- and postoperative audiometry showed significant improvement in hearing results in both groups. No significant difference between the obliteration materials was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of mastoid obliteration reveals that hydroxyapatite and bone pâté are safe and effective obliteration materials, with high success rates in achieving a dry ear, low recidivism rates, and good hearing outcome, respecting the short-term limitation. In addition, our study shows that hydroxyapatite results in fewer postoperative wound infections compared to bone pâté.
