ArticleOTO open
Efficacy of S53P4 Bioactive Glass for the Secondary Obliteration of Chronically Discharging Radical Cavities.
Article in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Use of S53P4 Bioactive Glass in the Treatment of Bone Defects and Infected Bone: A Systematic Review of the Quality of Clinical Outcomes and A Grade Assessment.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Pooled it
- Ear canal reconstruction in mastoid obliteration surgery for cholesteatoma or radical cavity: a review of the literature.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of bone obliteration in cholesteatoma surgery.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Present the results of the secondary obliteration of chronically discharging radical cavities using S53P4 bioactive glass (BAG). Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Single-center study. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted of all patients that underwent secondary obliteration of persistently draining radical cavities using S53P4 BAG between 2011 and 2022. Patients with middle ear cholesteatoma were excluded. The main outcome was postoperative otorrhea, as indicated by Merchant grading. Results: In total, 97 patients were included. The median postoperative follow-up time was 3.9 years (range 0.5-10.4). Average time between the original canal wall down surgery and the secondary obliteration was 25.3 years (SD 11.7, range 2-66). At the most recent follow-up visit, a Merchant grade of 0 to 1 was observed in 95% of the cases. There were no cases of sensorineural hearing loss or facial palsy, one case developed a retro auricular skin defect and 1 patient developed CSF leakage. Minor complications were seen in 10 patients (10%). Ossicular chain reconstruction with a titanium prosthesis was performed in 42 cases, resulting in a median improvement of 11.2 dB in air conduction thresholds. In 9/42 cases (21%), closure of the postoperative air-bone gap to ≤20 dB was achieved. Twenty-five percent of cases could be discharged from out-patient visits. Conclusion: Revision of persistently draining radical cavities with BAG obliteration is feasible and results in a dry and safe ear in 95% of the patients, thereby enabling wearing of a conventional hearing aid. Out-patient visits could be ceased in 25% of the cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.