• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

The Great Debate: Canal-wall-up vs. canal-wall-down surgery for pediatric cholesteatomas

by Cornelia T. Kean • May 2, 2010

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

In 2004, Dr. Dornhoffer published a review of his eight-year experience with the technique (Otol Neurotol. 2004;25:653-660). The review included 46 patients, representing 50 ears (20 pediatric, 30 adult), who had undergone cholesteatoma surgery using the retrograde technique. The recurrence rate was 16 percent for all patients, including smokers, “which really is superior to most reviews of traditional CWU surgery, where long-term recurrence rates can be well over 50 percent,” Dr. Dornhoffer said.

You Might Also Like

  • Mastoid Obliteration Could Be Effective in Cholesteatoma Surgery, but More Data Are Needed
  • Canal Wall Up vs. Canal Wall Down: Symptom of a greater need?
  • Cholesteatoma: Is a Second Stage Necessary?
  • T1W Imaging May Aid in Diagnosing Cholesteatomas
Explore This Issue
May 2010

Since that study was done, he added, “I have done about a thousand ears using the retrograde technique, and I would say our rate of recurrence is down to about 10 percent using a single-stage surgery in more than 90 percent of patients.”

Dr. Dornhoffer acknowledged that his technique, which he learned from a prominent ENT surgeon in Germany, is not well accepted by otorhinolaryngologists in the U.S. “The retrograde approach is very different,” he said. “It takes some getting used to because it is really a hybrid between the traditional techniques of canal wall down and canal wall up.”

But he stressed that such reluctance should not detract from the larger point of his evolving experience with removing cholesteatomas in children. “The current thinking on canal-wall-up surgery, where surgeons knowingly commit patients to at least an initial surgery followed by a planned second-look surgery, is really not acceptable in this era of cost containment,” he said.

Dr. Gantz echoed Dr. Dornhoffer’s concerns over the economics of cholesteatoma surgery. “How many times are insurance companies going to pay for failure?” he said. “I would not be surprised if, someday, third-party payers tell you that they do not want you to continue with techniques that require several operations, especially where you have [such a significant] failure rate.”

With his mastoid reconstruction technique, for example, “you basically get rid of everything that predisposes patients to recurrent cholesteatomas, such as the mastoid mucosa. Yes, you have to be a very meticulous surgeon to do all of that, and to be sure you’re not trapping cholesteatoma-prone skin in the area of reconstruction. But it’s a learnable technique and one that truly benefits a large range of children and adult patients.”

When to Convert?

Jeffrey P. Harris, MD, PhD, FACS, professor and chief of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery at the University of California, San Diego, said that he also has seen a high rate of recurrences with CWU. But he has not abandoned the procedure completely. He still does CWU surgery in most patients with new cholesteatomas, but now he is much more willing to take the canal wall down if, at a planned second-look surgery, disease recurs. That willingness “is mostly due to the nature of this disease in children,” Dr. Harris explained. “Most of them have very poor Eustachian tube function. As a result, negative pressure builds up in the middle ear, and when the canal wall is left intact, that pressure pulls tissue into the epitympanum space where cholesteatomas often reform.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Medical Education, Otology/Neurotology, Pediatric, Practice Focus Tagged With: cholesteatomas, debate, Otology, pediatrics, surgery, techniquesIssue: May 2010

You Might Also Like:

  • Mastoid Obliteration Could Be Effective in Cholesteatoma Surgery, but More Data Are Needed
  • Canal Wall Up vs. Canal Wall Down: Symptom of a greater need?
  • Cholesteatoma: Is a Second Stage Necessary?
  • T1W Imaging May Aid in Diagnosing Cholesteatomas

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • 22 Symptoms Common to Patients with Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939