International Journal of Head and Neck Surgery

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2023 ) > List of Articles


A Case of Temporal Bone Erosion: Our Diagnostic Dilemma

H Shilpa, Amrita Suzanne Mathew

Keywords : Acquired cholesteatoma, Cholesterol granuloma, Temporal bone

Citation Information : Shilpa H, Mathew AS. A Case of Temporal Bone Erosion: Our Diagnostic Dilemma. Int J Head Neck Surg 2023; 14 (1):13-15.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10001-1548

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 21-02-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Background: Cholesteatoma is a sac containing keratin debris surrounded by keratinized squamous epithelium with bone-eroding properties. Secondary cholesteatoma is the commonest type of cholesteatoma. Middle ear cleft cholesterol granulomas (CG) usually present with middle ear effusion and features of diffuse mastoid disease. Hemorrhage, drainage obstruction, and impaired ventilation precipitate CG formation. The latter two factors also contribute to the pathogenesis of chronic otitis media (COM) and cholesteatoma, often leading to their coexistence. CGs are rarely aggressive and are encased by thick fibrous tissue with bone-eroding capabilities. However, differentiation of a cholesteatoma from a CG based on computerized tomography (CT) is difficult and necessitates magnetic resonance imaging. Case description: We report a rare case of a secondary cholesteatoma with a coexistent erosive tympanomastoid CG causing erosion of the basal turn of the cochlea but with an intact scutum, thereby presenting a diagnostic challenge. Conclusion: Evidence of bone erosion on a computerized tomogram in patients with COM does not indicate the mere presence of a cholesteatoma. A differential diagnosis which includes other erosive conditions such as glomus tympanicum, CG, etc., which can coexist with a cholesteatoma, should be considered and investigated accordingly in order to plan its surgical treatment.

  1. Miglets AW, Booth JB. Cholesterol granuloma presenting as an isolated middle ear tumor. Laryngoscope 1981;91(3):401–405. DOI: 10.1288/00005537-198103000-00011
  2. Mafee MF, Nozawa A. Primary and secondary cholesteatomas, cholesterol granuloma, and mucocele of the temporal bone: role of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging with emphasis on diffusion-weighted imaging. Operative techniques in Otolaryngology 2014;25(1):36–48. DOI: 10.1016/j.otot.2013.11.006
  3. Yang NW. Blunting of the scutum: a key feature in the radiological diagnosis of acquired cholesteatoma. Phillipine J Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery 2009;23(1):37–38. DOI: 10.32412/pjohns.v23i1.775
  4. Raza SS, Hussain AK, Saboor H, et al. Glomus tympanicum tumor–A rare presentation in a tertiary care hospital of Peshawar. NJMS 2016;1(3):138–140. Available at:
  5. Kuruma T, Tanigawa T, Uchida Y, et al. Large cholesterol granuloma of the middle ear eroding into the middle cranial fossa. Case reports in Otolaryngology 2017;2017:4793786. DOI: 10.1155/2017/4793786
  6. Pfister MHP, Jackler RK, Kunda L. Aggressiveness in cholesterol granuloma of the temporal bone may be determined by the vigor of its blood source. Otol Neurotol 2007;28(2):232–235. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31802bea4b
  7. Iannella G, Stasolla A, Pasquariello B, et al. Tympanomastoid cholesterol granuloma: radiological and intraoperative findings of blood source connection. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273(9):2395–2401. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-015-3820-5
  8. Rogha M, Hashemi SM, Mokhtarinejad F, et al. Comparison of preoperative temporal bone CT with intraoperative findings in patients with cholesteatoma. Iranian J Otorhinolaryngology 2014;26(74):7–12. DOI: 10.22038/IJORL.2014.2020
  9. Sharma VK, Prajapati N, Sharma R, et al. Radiological changes in anatomy of temporal bone in cases of unsafe chronic suppurative otitis media: a retrospective study. Indian J Otol 2017;23(3):176–179. DOI: 10.4103/indianjotol.INDIANJOTOL_15_17
  10. Brown JS. A ten year statistical follow–up of 1142 consecutive cases of cholesteatoma: the closed vs. the open technique. The Laryngoscope 1982;92(4):390–396. DOI: 10.1288/00005537-198204000-00007
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.