OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the graft outcome and postoperative infection of with and without the use of antibiotic ointment following myringoplasty for the treatment of chronic perforations.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: 135 chronic perforations were prospectively randomized to use of antibiotic ointment group (UAO, n = 68) or no use of antibiotic ointment group (NAO, n = 67) following myringoplasty. The graft outcomes and postoperative infection were compared among two groups at 6 months.
RESULTS: At postoperative 6 months, the graft infection rate was 4.4% in the UAO group and 10.4% in the NAO group, the difference was not significant (P = 0.312).The graft success rates were 92.6% in the UAO group and 91.0% in the NAO group, the difference was not significant (P = 0.979). In the UAO group, 3 patients with purulence ear discharge resulted in a residual perforation although they received ofloxacin ear drops and intravenous antibiotic therapy treatment. In the NAO group, 6 patients with purulence ear discharge resulted in a residual perforation, only one, with mild purulence discharge was successfully treated and closed. In addition, no significant between-group differences were observed pre- (P = 0.746) or post- (P = 0.521) operative air bone gap (ABG) values or mean ABG gain (P = 0.745). However, granular myringitis with minimal moistness but without infection has been noted in 3 (4.4%) patients in the UAO group and in 5 (7.5%) in the NAO group, the difference was not significant (P = 0.699).
CONCLUSIONS: Use and non-use of antibiotic ointments for lateral packing of graft are both comparable methods following myringoplasty for postoperative infection and graft outcomes.

Antibiotic ointments are often used to treat or prevent infections in surgical wounds. However, due to a dearth of reports on adverse effects, the complications of the use of such ointments, especially possible long-term effects, are largely unknown. We experienced a unique case of a cystic lesion that developed after surgical site infection treated with gentamicin ointment in a 62-year-old man who underwent subtotal glossectomy for tongue cancer. The antibiotic ointment that was applied following abscess drainage remained there, replacing the abscess cavity and forming an oval mass. The lesion was found incidentally on follow-up MR examination to monitor cancer recurrence. On both T1- and T2-weighted images, it showed high-intensity reflecting oily base material, constituting the ointment, which appeared to be a fat-containing tumor such as a lipoma that had arisen at the surgical site. Echo-guided drainage extracted the ointment, which was seemingly unaltered from the time it was applied 11 months before. We describe the clinical course and imaging findings to acknowledge this potential adverse effect associated with topical antibiotic treatment for surgical site infection.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic or silver-based dressings are widely used in burn wound care. Our standard method of dressing pediatric extremity burn wounds consists of an antibiotic ointment or nystatin ointment-impregnated nonadherent gauze (primary layer), followed by rolled gauze, soft cast pad, plaster and soft casting tape (3M™ Scotchcast™, St. Paul, MN). The aim of this study was to compare our standard ointment-based primary layer versus Mepitel Ag® (Mölnlycke Health Care, Gothenburg, Sweden) in the management of pediatric upper and lower extremity burn wounds.
METHODS: Children with a new burn injury to the upper or lower extremities, who presented to the burn clinic were eligible. Eligible children were enrolled and randomized, stratified by burn thickness, to be dressed in an ointment-based dressing or Mepitel Ag®. Study personnel and participants were not blinded to the dressing assignment after randomization. Dressings were changed approximately once or twice per week, until the burn wound was healed or skin-grafted. The primary outcome was time to wound healing and p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: Ninety-six children with 113 upper or lower extremity burns were included in the analysis. Mepitel Ag® (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.40-0.82); p = 0.002) significantly reduced the rate of wound healing, adjusting for burn thickness and fungal wound infection. The incidence of fungal wound infections and skin grafting was similar between the two groups. Children randomized to standard ointment dressings were significantly less likely to require four or more burn clinic visits than those in the Mepitel Ag® (4% versus 27%; p = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that our standard ointment-based dressing significantly increases the rate of wound healing compared to Mepitel Ag® for pediatric extremity burn injuries.
METHODS: Treatment study; Level 1.