No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Bioactive glass (S53P4) as obliteration material in subtotal petrosectomy: initial experience
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 May 2022
Abstract
Background
Subtotal petrosectomy for chronic suppurative otitis media requires obliteration of the mastoid cavity and middle ear. Usually, abdominal fat is used for this purpose. However, infection is a risk of using fat, which might require revision surgery. The use of S53P4 bioactive glass with antibacterial properties seems an attractive alternative.
Methods
Two patients with a history of chronic suppurative otitis media, complicated by profound perceptive hearing loss, had already been surgically treated, and were thereafter extensively treated conservatively. Because of recurrent chronic otorrhoea and pain, subtotal petrosectomy with obliteration of the cavity with S53P4 bioactive glass was performed.
Results
Follow-up duration was 84 months and 18 months, respectively. No complications occurred peri-operatively. A dry ear was obtained and no late adverse events were observed.
Conclusion
S53P4 bioactive glass is feasible to use for obliteration after subtotal petrosectomy. Elimination of chronic suppurative otitis media can be achieved with this technique. The bioactive glass granules might be an attractive alternative to abdominal fat, which has a risk of infection.
- Type
- Short Communications
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of J.L.O. (1984) LIMITED
Footnotes
Dr J J Lindeboom takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper
References
Coker, NJ, Jenkins, HA, Fisch, U. Obliteration of the middle ear and mastoid cleft in subtotal petrosectomy: indications, technique, and results. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1986;95:5–11CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prasad, SC, Roustan, V, Piras, G, Caruso, A, Lauda, L, Sanna, M. Subtotal petrosectomy: surgical technique, indications, outcomes, and comprehensive review of literature. Laryngoscope 2017;127:2833–42CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartels, LJ, Sheehy, JL. Total obliteration of the mastoid, middle ear, and external auditory canal. A review of 27 cases. Laryngoscope 1981;91:1100–8Google ScholarPubMed
Yung, M. The use of temporoparietal fascial flap to eliminate wound breakdown in subtotal petrosectomy for chronic discharging ears. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:248–51CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vos, J, de Veij Mestdagh, PD, Colnot, DR, Borggreven, PA, Orelio, CC, Quak, JJ. Bioactive glass obliteration of the mastoid significantly improves surgical outcome in non-cholesteatomatous chronic otitis media patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:4121–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindfors, N, Hyvönen, P, Nyyssönen, M, Kirjavainen, M, Kankare, J, Gullichsen, E et al. Bioactive glass S53P4 as bone graft substitute in treatment of osteomyelitis. Bone 2010;47:212–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romanò, C, Logoluso, N, Meani, E, Romanò, D, De Vecchi, E, Vassena, C et al. A comparative study of the use of bioactive glass S53P4 and antibiotic-loaded calcium-based bone substitutes in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis: a retrospective comparative study. Bone Joint J 2014;96:845–50CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferrando, A, Part, J, Baeza, J. Treatment of cavitary bone defects in chronic osteomyelitis: bioactive glass S53P4 vs. calcium sulphate antibiotic beads. J Bone Jt Infect 2017;2:194–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silvola, JT. Mastoidectomy cavity obliteration with bioactive glass: a pilot study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;147:119–26CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, JR. Review of bioactive glass: from Hench to hybrids. Acta Biomater 2013;9:4457–86CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Gestel, NA, Geurts, J, Hulsen, DJ, van Rietbergen, B, Hofmann, S, Arts, JJ. Clinical applications of S53P4 bioactive glass in bone healing and osteomyelitic treatment: a literature review. Biomed Res Int 2015;2015:684826CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Veij Mestdagh, PD, Colnot, DR, Borggreven, PA, Orelio, CC, Quak, JJ. Mastoid obliteration with S53P4 bioactive glass in cholesteatoma surgery. Acta Otolaryngol 2017;137:690–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernardeschi, D, Pyatigorskaya, N, Russo, FY, De Seta, D, Corallo, G, Ferrary, E et al. Anatomical, functional, and quality-of-life results for mastoid and epitympanic obliteration with bioactive glass s53p4: a prospective clinical study. Clin Otolaryngol 2017;42:387–96CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skoulakis, C, Koltsidopoulos, P, Iyer, A, Kontorinis, G. Mastoid obliteration with synthetic materials: a review of the literature. J Int Adv Otol 2019;15:400–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yan, F, Reddy, PD, Isaac, MJ, Nguyen, SA, McRackan, TR, Meyer, TA. Subtotal petrosectomy and cochlear implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2021;147:23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gubler, M, Brunner, T, Zehnder, M, Waltimo, T, Sener, B, Stark, WJ. Do bioactive glasses convey a disinfecting mechanism beyond a mere increase in pH? Int Endod J 2008;41:670–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, D, Leppäranta, O, Munukka, E, Ylänen, H, Viljanen, MK, Eerola, E et al. Antibacterial effects and dissolution behavior of six bioactive glasses. J Biomed Mater Res A 2010;93:475–83Google ScholarPubMed
Begum, S, Johnson, WE, Worthington, T, Martin, RA. The influence of pH and fluid dynamics on the antibacterial efficacy of 45S5 Bioglass. Biomed Mater 2016;11:015006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drago, L, Toscano, M, Bottagisio, M. Recent evidence on bioactive glass antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity: a mini review. Materials (Basel) 2018;11:326CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmermans, AJ, Quak, JJ, Hagen, PJ, Colnot, DR. 18F-NaF PET/CT imaging of bone formation induced by bioactive glass S53P4 after mastoid obliteration. Eur J Hybrid Imaging 2019;3:18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed