Although randomized trials are lacking, the results of our best-evidence synthesis indicate that the second cochlear implant might be especially useful in sound localization and possibly also in language development.

The available evidence for ISR treatment is still limited owing to methodologic heterogeneity; therefore, no recommendation on the optimal intervention can be provided. Although PTA is the common treatment for ISR, recurrent ISR seems to limit the durability, leading to recurrent interventions and cost implications. A uniform definition for ISR is needed with a standardized workup to compare the treatment options based on individual patient data analysis. Drug-eluting techniques are emerging and may become the preferred treatment option, but long-term follow-up is needed to evaluate their efficacy. Further study and understanding of the effect of drug-eluting technologies on the brain and neurologic function is warranted.

The Advanced Bionics® (AB)-York crescent of sound is a new test setup that comprises speech intelligibility in noise and localization tests that represent everyday listening situations. One of its tests is the Sentence Test with Adaptive Randomized Roving levels (STARR) with sentences and noise both presented from straight ahead. For the Dutch population, we adopted the AB-York setup and replaced the English sentences with a validated set of Dutch sentences. The Dutch version of the STARR is called the Utrecht-STARR (U-STARR). This study primarily assesses the validity and reliability of the U-STARR compared to the Plomp test, which is the current Dutch gold standard for speech-in-noise testing. The outcome of both tests is a speech reception threshold in noise (SRTn). Secondary outcomes are the SRTn measured with sounds from spatially separated sources (SISSS) as well as sound localization capability. We tested 29 normal-hearing adults and 18 postlingually deafened adult patients with unilateral cochlear implants (CI). This study shows that the U-STARR is adequate and reliable and seems better suited for severely hearing-impaired persons than the conventional Plomp test. Further, CI patients have poor spatial listening skills, as demonstrated with the AB-York test.

PurposeIncreased arterial tortuosity has been suggested as a predisposing factor for carotid artery dissection, which is an important risk factor for development of extracranial carotid artery aneurysms (ECAA). Prior to comparison with non-ECAA controls, the optimal measurement technique should be defined. This study describes the difference between software packages in terms of reproducibility and absolute outcome of arterial tortuosity measurements in ECAA patients.MethodsCT-angiography analysis was performed on 12 ECAA patients selected from our registry, using four software packages: 3mensio Vascular, TeraRecon, Vital Images, and Aycan OsiriX PRO. The tortuosity index (TI) was calculated from the skull base until the carotid bifurcation and aortic arch, and was defined as the centerline’s true length divided by the straight line distance. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to quantify inter- and intra-observer variability within one software package, and differences in measured TI between packages.ResultsInter-observer agreement was nearly perfect for 3mensio, excellent for Vital Images and OsiriX, and substantial for TeraRecon, with ICC 0.99 (0.96–1.0), 0.90 (0.69–0.97), 0.84 (0.53–0.95), and 0.72 (0.28–0.91), respectively. Intra-observer agreement ranged from ICC 1.0 for 3mensio to 0.91 for TeraRecon. Agreements in TI ranged from ICC 0.99 (0.98–1.0) for 3mensio vs. OsiriX, to 0.95 (0.82–0.98) for 3mensio vs. TeraRecon. Median time needed to complete one round of measurements was highest for OsiriX (p = 0.013).ConclusionsCarotid artery tortuosity measurements are reproducible and comparable between current commercially available software packages, with high intra-observer agreement. Although the reproducibility differed per software packages, all packages scored an acceptable inter-observer agreement.

Background and purposeAneurysms in various arterial beds have common risk- and genetic factors. Data on the correlation of extracranial carotid artery aneurysms (ECAA) with aneurysms in other vascular territories are lacking. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of ECAA in patients with an intracranial aneurysm (IA).MethodsWe used prospectively collected databases of consecutive patients registered at the University Medical Center Utrecht with an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) or aneurysmal Subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). The medical files of patients included in both databases were screened for availability of radiological reports, imaging of the brain and of the cervical carotid arteries. All available radiological images were then reviewed primarily for the presence of an ECAA and secondarily for an extradural/cavernous carotid or vertebral artery aneurysm. An ECAA was defined as a fusiform dilation ≥150% of the normal internal or common carotid artery or a saccular distention of any size.ResultsWe screened 4465 patient records (SAH database n = 3416, UIA database n = 1049), of which 2931 had radiological images of the carotid arteries available. An ECAA was identified in 12/638 patients (1.9%; 95% CI 1.1–3.3) with completely imaged carotid arteries and in 15/2293 patients (0.7%; 95% CI 0.4–1.1) with partially depicted carotid arteries. Seven out of 27 patients had an additional extradural (cavernous or vertebral artery) aneurysm.ConclusionsThis comprehensive study suggests a prevalence for ECAA of approximately 2% of patients with an IA. The rarity of the disease makes screening unnecessary so far. Future registry studies should study the factors associated with IA and ECAA to estimate the prevalence of ECAA in these young patients more accurately.