Reassessing the Utility of Surgical Intervention for Skull Base Osteomyelitis: A 16‐Year Experience

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveThe role of surgery in lateral skull base osteomyelitis (SBO) is controversial. Surgical intervention is often requested by consulting services in the interest of additional culture data to inform medical management. However, whether surgery alters subsequent antibiotic treatment or modifies disease outcome remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of surgical intervention in the treatment of SBO by (1) comparing nonsurgical and surgical culture data and (2) assessing clinical outcomes and treatment course following surgical intervention.Study DesignRetrospective.SettingTertiary care center.MethodsThe electronic record was queried for all patients with SBO who presented to a single institution over a 16‐year period (2007‐2023). Information recorded included history and exam, bedside and intraoperative culture data, antibiotic course, and disease outcomes. Primary outcome measures included change in medical management based on intraoperative cultures, recurrence rates, and mortality rates.ResultsForty patients (41 ears, average age 73 ± 13 years) met inclusion criteria. Out of 13 (32%) patients who underwent surgical intervention, one intraoperative culture changed the antibiotic course due to identification of resistance to the original antibiotic used. Surgery did not demonstrate a benefit in overall mortality (23% vs 18%, P = 0.36) or facial nerve function (33% vs 50%, P = 0.56) compared to medical management, and was associated with increased recurrence rates (54% vs 11%, P = 0.05).ConclusionSurgical cultures rarely changed antibiotic selection. Surgical debridement in treatment‐refractory SBO was also not associated with improvement in recurrence or mortality rates, though this may reflect underlying differences in disease severity.