The effect of bony obliteration on quality of life after tympano‐mastoidectomy surgery: A prospective observational controlled cohort study

Objectives The study's primary objective was to compare the quality of life (QoL) and external auditory canal (EAC) hygiene among patients who underwent bony mastoid obliteration or meatoplasty after canal wall down (CWD) mastoidectomy. Methods A prospective, observational, controlled cohort study was conducted at our tertiary referral university hospital. Twenty‐eight patients older than 16 years of age with chronic otitis media who underwent CWD mastoidectomy were included. Two cohorts were followed: CWD mastoidectomy followed by mastoid obliteration (Group 1, n = 14) and CWD mastoidectomy followed by meatoplasty (Group 2, n = 14). The main outcome measures of total COMBI score (postoperative 6‐month QoL) and EAC hygiene were compared between the groups. Results The average age of the patients was 36.14 (12. 22) years; 15 (53.6%) were female and 13 (46.4%) were male. There were no differences in demographic variables, preoperative findings, or COMQ‐12 (preoperative QoL) scores between groups. The average COMBI score of Group 1 (49.0 [8.66]) was not significantly different from Group 2 (46.79 [7.76]) (p = .482). Poor EAC hygiene was observed in eight (57.1%) patients in Group 2 and three (21.4%) patients in Group 1 (p = .06). In Group 1, no resorption of graft material was observed in 10 (71.4%) patients, minor resorption was observed in three (21.4%) patients, and significant resorption was observed in one (7.1%) patient. There were no significant differences in audiological findings between groups (p > .05). Conclusion There were no significant differences regarding short‐term postoperative QoL, EAC hygiene, or hearing outcomes between patients who underwent bony mastoid obliteration or meatoplasty after CWD mastoidectomy. Level of Evidence 1b (individual prospective cohort study). Bony mastoid obliteration may provide a more efficient external auditory canal with a protected self‐cleaning mechanism. However, it may not create a big difference from the patients’ points of view.