Objective: Our study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of mastoid obliteration compared to the canal wall up (CWU) technique in cholesteatoma surgery based on the systematic review of the literature and the meta-analysis of the data.Methods: The systematic search was performed in four major databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and CENTRAL) on October 14, 2021. Studies comparing the CWU technique and mastoid obliteration were included. The exclusion criteria were less than 12 months follow-up, congenital cholesteatoma, indefinite description of the surgical method, and animal studies. The protocol was registered on Prospero (registration number: CRD42021282485). The risk of bias was evaluated with the ROBINS-I tool. Residual and recurrent disease proportions as primary outcomes, quality of life, ear discharge, infection rates, hearing results, and operation time as secondary outcomes were analyzed. In the quantitative synthesis, the random effect model was used, and heterogeneity was identified.Results: A total of 11 articles with 2077 operations' data were found eligible. All the identified studies were retrospective cohorts. The odds of pooled residual and recurrent disease proportion were significantly lower in the obliteration group compared to CWU (OR = 0.45, CI:0.28;0.80, p = 0.014). However, when separated, the proportion of ears with recurrent (OR = 0.41, CI:0.11;1.57, p = 0.140) or residual (OR = 0.59, CI:0.23, 1.50, p = 0.207) disease did not show a significant difference, even though the odds were quite similar. The qualitative synthesis identified no significant difference in the secondary outcomes, but obliteration elongated the operation time.Conclusion: Mastoid obliteration significantly decreased the proportion of residual and recurrent cholesteatoma in pooled analyses compared to the CWU technique with low-quality of data.

Background: Alopecia areata (AA) is a chronic autoimmune condition that can lead to a serious deterioration in patients’ quality of life. The first line of treatment in patchy AA is triamcinolone acetonide (TrA); however, the efficacy of the treatment varies greatly. Our aim was to investigate the therapeutic effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of AA. Method: We performed a systematic literature search in four databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) reporting on patients with AA treated with PRP were included, comparing PRP with TrA or a placebo. The primary outcome was the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score. Results: Our systematic search provided a total of 2747 articles. We identified four studies eligible for quantitative analysis. The pooled mean differences from the four studies did not exhibit a significant difference in the mean change in the SALT score when PRP and TrA groups were compared (MD =−2.04, CI: −4.72–0.65; I2 = 80.4%, p = 0.14). Conclusions: PRP is a promising topical, steroid-free treatment modality in the therapy of AA. No significant difference was found between PRP and TrA treatment; however, further high-quality RCTs are needed to further assess the efficacy of PRP treatment and strengthen the quality of evidence.

Purpose Based on a systematic review and meta-analysis, our study aimed to provide information about the factors that influence the success of tympanic membrane reconstruction. Methods Our systematic search was conducted on November 24, 2021, using the CENTRAL, Embase, and MEDLINE databases. Observational studies with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up on type I tympanoplasty or myringoplasty were included, while non-English articles, patients with cholesteatoma or specific inflammatory diseases, and ossiculoplasty cases were excluded. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021289240) and PRISMA reporting guideline was used. Risk of bias was evaluated with the QUIPS tool. A random effect model was used in the analyses. Primary outcome was the rate of closed tympanic cavities. Results After duplicate removal, 9454 articles were found, of which 39 cohort studies were included. Results of four analyses showed significant effects: age (OR: 0.62, CI 0.50; 0.78, p value: 0.0002), size of the perforation (OR: 0.52, CI 0.29; 0.94, p value: 0.033), opposite ear condition (OR: 0.32, CI 0.12; 0.85, p value: 0.028), and the surgeon’s experience (OR: 0.42, CI 0.26; 0.67, p value: 0.005), while prior adenoid surgery, smoking, the site of the perforation, and discharge of the ear did not. Four factors: etiology, Eustachian tube function, concomitant allergic rhinitis, and duration of the ear discharge were analyzed qualitatively. Conclusions The age of the patient, the size of the perforation, the opposite ear status, and the surgeon’s experience have a significant effect on the success of tympanic membrane reconstruction. Further comprehensive studies are needed to analyze the interactions between the factors. Level of evidence Not applicable.