Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To characterize a series of patients with MRI evidence of spontaneous vestibular schwannoma (VS) regression. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective case series. METHODS:Retrospective review between 2012 and 2020 from a single, tertiary-care center of all patients with an untreated, sporadic VS and spontaneous regression in volumetric tumor size over the course of observation. The main outcome measures included VS size and location, presenting symptoms, medication use, changes in pure-tone averages and word recognition scores. RESULTS:/yr). Five patients were classified as having major regression, defined by a relative decrease in volume of >40%, while eight patients had minor regression (<40% relative volume reduction). No significant differences in initial tumor size, rate of regression, or audiometric changes were observed between the major and minor regression cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with evidence of a spontaneously shrinking VS have a heterogeneous presentation. Due to the scarcity of this phenomenon, predicting which tumors will eventually undergo regression remains unclear. Employing volumetric measurements to compare serial MRI scans may improve the accuracy of detecting shrinking tumors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:4 Laryngoscope, 2020.

OBJECTIVE:To describe our institutional experience with cochlear implantation (CI) for rehabilitation of hearing loss in Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) patients. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective review between 1989 and 2019. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary-care center. PATIENTS/METHODS:Twenty-four patients (67% female, mean age 45.6years) with NF2. Management of their ipsilateral vestibular schwannoma included microsurgery (n=12), stereotactic radiation (n=5), and observation (n=7). INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Ability to obtain open-set speech, daily device usage and long-term device benefit. RESULTS:All patients achieved some degree of sound awareness with CI. Nineteen patients (79%) achieved open-set speech understanding with a mean word-recognition score of 43% (range 0-88%). Patients with tumors 1.5 cm or less demonstrated the better speech understanding, without significant differences among treatment modalities. For tumors greater than 1.5 cm, patients who underwent microsurgery had a lower rate of open-set speech understanding compared to those treated with radiation or observation. Regular daily device use in 83% of patients was found. Long-term use (>10years) was observed in several patients, though some ultimately required reimplantation with an auditory brainstem implant due to progressive tumor growth. Mean follow-up duration was 4.1 years (range 0.4-15). CONCLUSIONS:Cochlear implantation can be an effective treatment for hearing loss in NF2 patients provided the cochlear nerve is intact, regardless of prior management for the ipsilateral tumor. The degree of benefit varies and is influenced by tumor size. Management strategies that preserve the cochlear nerve maximize the interval during which a CI could be of benefit to NF2 patients.

OBJECTIVE:To describe outcomes with cochlear implantation (CI) for rehabilitation of hearing loss in patients with sporadic vestibular schwannomas (VS) and other retrocochlear pathologies. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective review. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary-care center. PATIENTS/METHODS:Twenty three cases in 19 patients (53% men, mean age 55.8 yr) with non-neurofibromatosis type 2 related retrocochlear pathology. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Unilateral or bilateral CI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Word recognition score, device usage. RESULTS:Etiology of deafness included sporadic VS (n = 9, 39%), radiation after head and neck or central nervous system (CNS) malignancy (n = 8, 35%), superficial siderosis (n = 3, 13%), neurosarcoidosis (n = 2, 9%), and pontine stroke (n = 1, 4%). Mean follow-up duration was 2.3 years (standard deviation [SD] 3.0; range, 0.2-9.4). Auditory perception was achieved in 20 out of 22 patients (91%) who have been activated. Mean WRS in patients with sporadic VS was 18% (SD 20; range, 0-44). Mean WRS in patients with non-VS retrocochlear pathology was 55% (SD 30; range, 0-94). Data logs showed 7.0 h/d of average use (SD 4.3; range, 0-13). CONCLUSIONS:Appropriately selected patients with retrocochlear pathology may benefit from CI so long as the patient has a cochlear fluid signal and an intact cochlear nerve. Patients with sporadic VS patients and normal contralateral hearing exhibited guarded outcomes with CI, whereas most patients with non-VS retrocochlear pathologies demonstrated open-set speech understanding scores comparable to or slightly worse than conventional CI candidates. Since variable performance benefit is observed with CI in patients with retrocochlear pathology, counseling is imperative to align patient expectations with realistic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:To describe our experience with adults undergoing cochlear implantation (CI) for treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD). STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective case review. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS/METHODS:Fifty-three adults with SSD. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Unilateral CI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Speech perception testing in quiet and noise, tinnitus suppression, and device usage from datalogs. RESULTS:The mean age at CI was 53.2 years (SD 11.9). The mean duration of deafness was 4.0 years (SD 7.8). The most common etiology was idiopathic sudden SNHL (50%). Word recognition improved from 8.7% (SD 15) preoperatively to 61.8% (SD 20) at a mean follow-up of 3.3 years (SD 1.8) (p < 0.0001). Adaptive speech recognition testing in the "binaural with CI" condition (speech directed toward the front and noise toward the normal hearing ear) revealed a significant improvement by 2.6-dB SNR compared to the preoperative unaided condition (p = 0.0002) and by 3.6-dB SNR compared to when a device to route sound to the contralateral side was used (p < 0.0001). Tinnitus suppression was reported to be complete in 23 patients (43%) and improved in 20 patients (38%) while the device was on. The addition of the CI did not lead to a decrement in hearing performance in any spatial configuration. Device usage averaged 8.7 (SD 3.7) hours/day. CONCLUSIONS:Cochlear implantation in adult SSD patients can suppress tinnitus and achieve speech perception outcomes comparable with CI in conventional candidates. Modest improvements in spatial hearing were also observed and primarily attributable to the head shadow effect. Careful patient selection and counseling regarding potential benefits are important to optimize outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:To report the outcomes on a large series of elderly patients who underwent cochlear implantation (CI) surgery under local anesthesia with conscious sedation (LA-CS). METHODS:Retrospective chart review on 100 consecutive elderly patients (> 65 years) who underwent CI with LA-CS at a tertiary care center between August 2013 and January 2020. An age-matched control group of 50 patients who underwent CI with general anesthesia (GA) are used for comparison. Outcomes measured included time in the operating room, time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and rate of adverse events. RESULTS:Cochlear implant surgery under LA-CS was successfully performed in 99 (99%) patients. One patient requiring conversion to GA intraoperatively. No patients in the LA-CS group experienced cardiopulmonary adverse events; however, three patients (6%) in the GA group experienced minor events including atrial fibrillation and/or demand ischemia. Overnight observation in the hospital due to postoperative medical concerns or prolonged wake-up from anesthesia was required in one patient (1%) from the LA-CS cohort and 12 patients (24%) from the GA cohort. Perioperative adverse events exclusive to the LA-CS group included severe intraoperative vertigo (8%), temporary facial nerve paresis (3%), and wound infection (1%). The average amount of time spent in the operating room was 37 minutes less for procedures performed under LA-CS compared to GA (P < .05). The average amount of time in recovery was similar for both groups (P > .05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Cochlear implant surgery under LA-CS offers many benefits and is a safe, feasible, and cost-effective alternative to GA when performed by experienced CI surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3 Laryngoscope, 2020.

The reasons why clinical outcomes with auditory brainstem implants (ABIs) are generally poorer than with cochlear implants (CIs) are still somewhat elusive. Prior work has focused on differences in processing of spectral information due to possibly poorer tonotopic representation and higher channel interaction with ABIs than with CIs. In contrast, this study examines the hypothesis that a potential contributing reason for poor speech perception in ABI users may be the relative lack of temporal responsiveness of the primary neurons that are stimulated by the ABI. The cochlear nucleus, the site of ABI stimulation, consists of different neuron types, most of which have much more complex responses than the auditory nerve neurons stimulated by a CI. Temporal responsiveness of primary stimulated neurons was assessed in a group of ABI and CI users by measuring recovery of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) from single-pulse forward masking. Slower ECAP recovery tended to be associated with poorer hearing outcomes in both groups. ABI subjects with the longest recovery time had no speech understanding or even no hearing sensation with their ABI device; speech perception for the one CI outlier with long ECAP recovery time was well below average. To the extent that ECAP recovery measures reveal temporal properties of the primary neurons that receive direct stimulation form neural prosthesis devices, they may provide a physiological underpinning for clinical outcomes of auditory implants. ECAP recovery measures may be used to determine which portions of the cochlear nucleus to stimulate, and possibly allow us to enhance the stimulation paradigms.

OBJECTIVE:To describe our experience with children undergoing unilateral cochlear implantation (CI) for treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD). STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective case series. METHODS:A retrospective case review from a tertiary referral center involving 14 pediatric patients (<18 years) with SSD who underwent unilateral CI. Speech perception testing in quiet and noise in the CI-only and bimodal conditions with at least 1 year of device use and device usage from data logs represent the main outcome measures. RESULTS:The mean age at CI was 5.0 years (median 4.4, range 1.0-11.8 years). The mean duration of deafness was 3.0 years (median 2.4, range 0.6-7.0 years). Mean follow-up was 3.4 years. Speech perception testing with a minimum of 1 year post-CI was available in eight patients. The mean word recognition scores (WRS) in the CI-only condition was 56%; a significant improvement from baseline. Testing in background noise with spatially separated speech and noise revealed that patients scored as well or better with the CI-on versus CI-off in all conditions and in no cases was interference from the CI noted. Data logs were reviewed for device usage which revealed an average use of 6.5 hr/d. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Cochlear implantation is a viable treatment option for pediatric SSD in this self-selected cohort. Open-set speech and improvement in background noise can be achieved. Careful patient selection and thorough counseling on expectations is paramount to achieving successful outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:IV Laryngoscope, 2020.

The aim of this study was to investigate surgical, anesthetic, and device-related complications associated with cochlear implantation (CI) in children younger than 1 year of age. This was a multicenter, retrospective chart review of all children with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss who underwent cochlear implantation with a Cochlear Nucleus Implant System before 1 year of age. Endpoints included perioperative course, major and minor surgical, anesthetic and device-related complications, and 30-day readmission rates. One hundred thirty-six infants (242 ears) met criteria. The mean age at implantation was 9.4 months (standard deviation 1.8). Six-month follow-up was reported in all patients. There were no major anesthetic or device-related complications. Adverse events were reported in 34 of implanted ears (14%; 7 major, 27 minor). Sixteen adverse events occurred ≤30 days of surgery, and 18 occurred >30 days of surgery. The 30-day readmission rate was 1.5%. The rate of adverse events did not correlate with preexisting medical comorbidities or duration under anesthesia. There was no significant difference detected in complication rate for patients younger than 9 months of age versus those 9 to 11 months of age. This study demonstrates the safety of CI surgery in infants and supports reducing the indication for cochlear implantation to younger than 1 year of age for children with bilateral, profound sensorineural hearing loss obtaining a Cochlear Nucleus Implant System.

In children with congenital deafness, cochlear implantation (CI) prior to 12 months of age offers the opportunity to foster more typical auditory development during late infancy and early childhood. Recent studies have found a positive association between early implantation and expressive and receptive language outcomes, with some children able to achieve normal language skills by the time of school entry. Universal newborn hearing screening improved early detection and diagnosis of congenital hearing loss, allowing for earlier intervention, including decision-making regarding cochlear implant (CI) candidacy. It can be more challenging to confirm CI candidacy in infants; therefore, a multidisciplinary approach, including objective audiometric testing, is recommended to not only confirm the diagnosis but also to counsel families regarding expectations and long-term management. Surgeons performing CI surgery in young children should consider both the anesthetic risks of surgery in infancy and the ways in which mastoid anatomy may differ between infants and older children or adults. Multiple studies have found CI surgery in infants can be performed safely and effectively. This article reviews current evidence regarding indications for implantation in children younger than 12 months of age and discusses perioperative considerations and surgical technique.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Some cochlear implant (CI) patients lose their residual hearing during surgery. Two factors that might play a role in residual hearing loss are the change in intracochlear hydraulic pressure and force on the cochlear wall during electrode insertion. The aim of this study is to investigate whether a difference in peak hydraulic pressure and peak force on the cochlear wall exists during a CI electrode insertion with different insertion techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Twenty fresh frozen temporal bones were used. Hydraulic pressure and force on the cochlear wall were recorded during straight electrode insertions with 1) slow versus fast insertion speed, 2) manual versus automatic insertion method and 3) round window approach (RWA) versus extended RWA (ERWA). RESULTS:When inserting with a slow compared to a fast insertion speed, the peak hydraulic pressure is 239% (95% CI: 130-399%) higher with a RWA and 58% (95% CI: 6-137%) higher with an ERWA. However, the peak force on the cochlear wall is a factor 29% less (95% CI: 13-43%) with a slow insertion speed. No effect was found of opening and insertion method. CONCLUSIONS:As contradictory findings were found for hydraulic pressure and force on the cochlear wall on insertion speed, it remains unclear which insertion speed (slow versus fast) is less traumatic to inner ear structure.