Retrosigmoidal placement of an active transcutaneous bone conduction implant: surgical and audiological perspectives in a multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: The retrosigmoidal (RS) placement of the Bonebridge system (BB) has been advocated for cases of unfavourable anatomical or clinical conditions which contraindicate transmastoid-presigmoidal positioning. However, these disadvantageous conditions, combined with the considerable dimensions of the implant, may represent a challenge, especially for surgeons with no skull base experience. Moreover, the literature reports only limited experience concerning RS implantation of the BB system. METHODS: A multicentre, retrospective study was conducted to analyse the surgical and functional outcomes of a wide population of patients undergoing RS placement of the BB system by means of a surgical technique specifically developed to overcome the intraoperative issues related to this surgery. Twenty patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss and single sided deafness were submitted to RS implantation of the BB system. RESULTS: Audiological assessment concerning the measurement of the functional and effective gain by pure-tone audiometry (28 dB HL and -12.25 dB HL, respectively) and speech audiometry (24.7 dB HL and -21 dB HL, respectively) was conducted. A high overall subjective improvement of quality of life was recorded with the Glasgow Benefit Inventory questionnaire. No major complications, such as device extrusions or other conditions requiring revision surgery, were reported during the follow-up period (median: 42 months). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, which has one of the largest cohort of patients reported in the literature, RS placement of the BB system was safe and effective. Our functional results showed comparable hearing outcomes with presigmoidal placement. The effective gain, rarely investigated in this field, may be the object of further research to improve our understanding of bone conduction mechanisms exploited by bone conduction hearing implants.

Sequential pediatric bilateral cochlear implantation: The effect of time interval between implants.

OBJECTIVE: To examine speech intelligibility in children subjected to sequential bilateral cochlear implants (CI) surgery and to assess the influence of the inter-stage interval duration. INTRODUCTION: Binaural hearing recovery can have additional benefits, especially in speech and language development in patients with congenital profound sensorineural hearing loss; so recently there has been an increase in the number of children receiving bilateral CI. METHODS: Twenty-seven children who underwent sequential bilateral cochlear implant (SBCI) with a short (1-3 yrs), medium (4-6 yrs) and long (7-12 yrs) range interval between both implantations, respectively, were evaluated. All patients underwent periodic speech perception test in quiet and noise after second implant activation in three conditions: with the first or second implant alone and with both implants. Results were examined according to the inter-stage interval. RESULTS: Speech intelligibility in noise was significantly better under bilateral conditions than either ear alone, in all three groups. Small improvements were seen in quiet, especially in the third group (6-12 yrs). CONCLUSION: Benefits of second implant in the early-implanted children and after a short inter-implant delay are more evident. However our study support that, even after a long period of deafness and despite a prolonged inter-stage interval, sequential bilateral cochlear implantation should be considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

Laboratory assessment of sudden sensorineural hearing loss: A case-control study.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) is an otologic emergency that affects five to 30 subjects per 100,000/year. The cause of SSHL remains unknown or uncertain in 70% to 90% of cases, and treatment decisions are usually made without knowing the etiology. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case-control study. METHODS: One hundred thirty-one idiopathic SSHL patients were recruited from January 2014 to June 2015 in concordance with the Statements of Clinical Practice Guideline and divided into groups according to the disease severity. A clinical laboratory assessment was completed on blood samples collected from SSHL patients and control subjects. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to investigate the association between laboratory data and SSHL basis. RESULTS: Only a few SSHL patients were positive for autoimmunity or viral infection. Statistically significant (P < .05) higher levels of blood glucose, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C), lipoprotein (a), and factor VIII were found in SSHL patients compared to controls. Furthermore, blood glucose, HbA1C, uric acid, factor VIII, and homocysteine were significantly associated to disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: Gluco-metabolic, lipidic, and coagulative laboratory data support the vascular hypothesis for SSHL and its severity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b Laryngoscope, 127:2375-2381, 2017.

Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak in Cochlear Implantation: Enlarged Cochlear versus Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct (Common Cavity Excluded).

Objective. To share our experience of cerebrospinal fluid gusher in cochlear implantation in patients with enlarged cochlear or vestibular aqueduct. Study Design. Case series with comparison and a review of the literature. Methods. A retrospective study was performed. Demographic and radiological results of patients with enlarged cochlear aqueduct or enlarged vestibular aqueduct in 278 consecutive cochlear implant recipients, including children and adults, were evaluated between January 2000 and December 2015. Results. Six patients with enlarged cochlear aqueduct and eight patients with enlarged vestibular aqueduct were identified. Cerebrospinal fluid gusher occurs in five subjects with enlarged cochlear aqueduct and in only one case of enlarged vestibular aqueduct. Conclusion. Based on these findings, enlarged cochlear aqueduct may be the best risk predictor of cerebrospinal fluid gusher at cochleostomy during cochlear implant surgery despite enlarged vestibular aqueduct.

Original Solution for Middle Ear Implant and Anesthetic/Surgical Management in a Child with Severe Craniofacial Dysmorphism.

We describe the novel solution adopted in positioning middle ear implant in a child with bilateral congenital aural atresia and craniofacial dysmorphism that have posed a significant challenge for the safe and correct management of deafness. A five-year-old child, affected by a rare congenital disease (Van Maldergem Syndrome), suffered from conductive hearing loss. Conventional skin-drive bone-conduction device, attached with a steel spring headband, has been applied but auditory restoration was not optimal. The decision made was to position Vibrant Soundbridge, a middle ear implant, with an original surgical application due to hypoplasia of the tympanic cavity. Intubation procedure was complicated due to child craniofacial deformities. Postoperative hearing rehabilitation involved a multidisciplinary team, showing improved social skills and language development.

Active bone conduction system: outcomes with the Bonebridge transcutaneous device.

OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with positioning the Bonebridge (BB) device, a semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction implant for patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as for those suffering from single-sided deafness. METHODS: The following is a retrospective case review of 4 adults suffering from conductive or mixed hearing loss and single-sided deafness. The BB device was implanted unilaterally via 2 different approaches selected case by case: the presigmoid transmastoid and the retrosigmoid approach. An audiological evaluation in the free field was conducted to observe the functional benefit with this device. The Glasgow Health Status Inventory (GHSI) and the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) questionnaires were filled out to evaluate patients' quality of life in relationship to the intervention. RESULTS: No intra- or postoperative complications were observed. The performance in the speech test in all 4 cases reached 100% in the aided condition at 65 dB, while in the unaided condition at 65 dB, it was less than 10%. The GHSI and GBI questionnaires showed an improvement in quality of life after implantation. CONCLUSIONS: The BB device is a safe and effective solution for individuals with pathologies such as chronic otitis media, atresia auris and otosclerosis with inadequate benefit from conventional surgery or bone conduction hearing aids.