ObjectiveTo discuss the difference among the three treatment methods in mastoidotympanectomy cavity and their clinical significance.Methods We study the clinical information of 65 patients who received operation, and divide them into three groups based on different treatment methods.Among these 65 cases, 21 cases were with no special treatment( group A); 24 cases were applied with myoperiosteal flap behind ears ( group B) and 20 cases were applied with allo-ADM ( group C).We also observe their repair process and epithelization time by follow-up visits.ResultThere are significant differences in postoperative repair process and epithelization time among these three groups.ConclusionThe application of myoperiosteal flap behind ear and allo-ADM in mastoidotympanectomy cavity can ease the cleaning and promote the epithelization of the mastoidotympanectomy cavity compared with the group A with no special treatment in mastoidotympanectomy cavity．However，the method of myoperiosteal flap behind ear has some shortcomings.For example, flap retraction can not cover the entire mastoid cavity, and there may exist inflammatory exudation in the early period of postoperation.The possibility of inflammatory exudation and granulation tissue proliferation in mastoidotympanectomy cavity applied with myoperiosteal flap behind ears would be higher relatively than that applied with allo-ADM.What’s more, the epithelization time of the mastoidotympanectomy cavity applied with myoperiosteal flap was slower than that applied with allo-ADM．