Patients are followed up in the ear, nose, and throat clinic to monitor for symptoms of cholesteatoma recurrence. During otoscopy, the cavity is examined for signs of a keratinous ear discharge. The mastoid cavity is often dry and may initially require wax removal in an aural care clinic.
A canal wall up mastoidectomy necessitates a second-look procedure at 9 to 12 months to examine for residual/recurrent disease. Alternatively, a non-echo-planar imaging diffusion-weighted MRI may be used in some patients.[28]De Foer B, Vercruysse JP, Bernaerts A, et al. Middle ear cholesteatoma: non-echo-planar diffusion-weighted MR imaging versus delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging - value in detection. Radiology. 2010 Jun;255(3):866-72.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20501723?tool=bestpractice.com
[29]De Foer B, Vercruysse JP, Bernaerts A, et al. Detection of postoperative residual cholesteatoma with non-echo-planar diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Otol Neurotol. 2008 Jun;29(4):513-7.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18520587?tool=bestpractice.com
There continues to be debate regarding which type of MRI is best to examine for recurrent cholesteatoma. Some authors advocate routine MRI scans (such as non-echo-planar, fast-spin echo, or diffusion weighted sequences) for follow-up, but caution that a negative scan may not be completely accurate as residual or recurrent disease may not yet be detectable. Non-echo-planar imaging was found to be more reliable compared with echo-planar imaging in identifying residual/recurrent cholesteatoma in one systematic review.[46]Jindal M, Riskalla A, Jiang D, et al. A systematic review of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of postoperative cholesteatoma. Otol Neurotol. 2011 Oct;32(8):1243-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21921855?tool=bestpractice.com
Patients will require continued follow-up.[47]Schwartz KM, Lane JI, Bolster BD Jr, et al. The utility of diffusion-weighted imaging for cholesteatoma evaluation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011 Mar;32(3):430-6.
http://www.ajnr.org/cgi/reprint/32/3/430
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20488909?tool=bestpractice.com
[48]Khemani S, Singh A, Lingam RK, et al. Imaging of postoperative middle ear cholesteatoma. Clin Radiol. 2011 Aug;66(8):760-7.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21524417?tool=bestpractice.com
[49]Clark MP, Westerberg BD, Fenton DM. The ongoing dilemma of residual cholesteatoma detection: are current magnetic resonance imaging techniques good enough? J Laryngol Otol. 2010 Dec;124(12):1300-4.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20202277?tool=bestpractice.com
A canal wall down procedure may allow examination of the cavity for recurrence, but if the attic has been reconstructed a second-look procedure or a non-echo-planar imaging diffusion-weighted MRI may be necessary to examine the middle ear for recurrent disease.
Some cavities persistently discharge despite topical medical therapy. This may be treated with revision mastoid surgery or, if the cavity discharges despite multiple procedures, the cavity may be obliterated.[59]Mehta RP, Harris JP. Mastoid obliteration. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2006 Dec;39(6):1129-42.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17097437?tool=bestpractice.com
Topical mitomycin has been found to be more effective than chemical cautery (with topical acetic acid) in achieving a dry cavity.[60]Karimi-Yazdi A, Amiri M, Rabiei S, et al. Topical application of mitomycin C in the treatment of granulation tissue after canal wall down mastoidectomy. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2013 Spring;25(71):85-90.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3846267
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24303425?tool=bestpractice.com