Hearing preservation and cochlear implants according to inner ear approach: multicentric evaluation

Guimarães, Alexandre Caixeta; Carvalho, Guilherme Machado de; Duarte, Alexandre Scalli Mathias; Bianchini, Walter Adriano; Sarasty, Andrea Bravo; Gregorio, María Fernanda Di; Zernotti, Mario; Sartorato, Edi Lúcia; Castilho, Arthur Menino

doi:10.1016/j.bjorl.2014.12.002

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The proportion of round window approach and cochleostomy approach was different between the two groups, which was statistically insignificant (p = 0.083; Fisher's exact test). In addition, it was reported that the rate of HP was not different between the two approaches [Guimaraes et al, 2015;Sun et al, 2015]. The electrode array type was also different between the two groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Dexamethasone Is One of the Factors Minimizing the Inner Ear Damage from Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implantation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of preoperative and intraoperative steroid administration for inner ear protection in cochlear implantation (CI). Nineteen subjects who underwent CI were included in the study, and 10 subjects were enrolled as controls (steroid-administered group, n = 19; control group, n = 10). Dexamethasone (dexamethasone sodium phosphate, 5 mg/ml) was systemically administered preoperatively (1 ml) and topically applied during CI (0.5 ml). The extent of hearing preservation (HP) after CI and the change in the bithermal caloric response were evaluated. Hearing level was calculated using mean thresholds [(250 Hz + 500 Hz + 1,000 Hz + 2,000 Hz)/4]. Preoperative hearing thresholds were similar in the steroid-administered and control groups (100.92 ± 12.60 vs. 103.29 ± 14.39 dB, p = 0.650). The mean thresholds significantly increased in both groups after surgery (108.46 ± 14.08 dB, p = 0.006, for the steroid-administered group; 117.50 ± 6.34 dB, p = 0.027, for the control group), and the difference between the groups was also significant (p = 0.027). The postoperative shift in the hearing thresholds at frequencies of 500 and 1,000 Hz was significant in the steroid-administered group and that at the frequencies of 500, 1,000 and 2,000 Hz was significant in the control group. However, the extent of the shift in hearing threshold levels at each frequency was not significantly different between the groups. Preservation of hearing thresholds was compared between the groups, and there were significantly more subjects with complete and partial HP in the steroid-administered group than in the control group (p = 0.008). The preoperative caloric response was maintained after CI in the steroid-administered group. This study suggests that the perioperative use of a steroid could minimize the inner ear damage after CI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Dexamethasone Is One of the Factors Minimizing the Inner Ear Damage from Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implantation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The same paper mentions further "a small number of studies reporting on children fitted with EAS have recently been published by Skarzynski et al" In its summary it says "Skarzynski and his group have demonstrated convincing results in their first studies on children" and further "however, Skarzynski stressed that this kind of surgery on children should not be attempted without significant successful experience with adults" and still further "by introducing this method, it became possible to improve hearing preservation, with rates going up to 95-100% in most EAS candidates." Guimares et al in the Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology in 2015 have said: "Some classifications for hearing preservation have been proposed to assess the degree of preservation of residual hearing, and the most commonly employed is that proposed by Skarzynski (…)" [29].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Partial Deafness: The Polish School in World Science

Skarżyńśki¹,

Skarżyński²

2017

Advances in Clinical Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction of the method of treatment of partial deafness with cochlear implants has given many patients the previously inaccessible chance to (re)enter the world of sounds. This method of treatment had been developed and introduced to the world's medicine by H. Skarżyński in 2002, after the extensive research since 1997. This task involved creation of a multispecialty team of experts, development of a special surgical method, and concept of the therapy reflecting on the world largest number of hearing improving surgeries being performed for 13 years averaging 15,000 otosurgical procedures yearly. This chapter introduces the treatment of partial deafness, considered as the Polish School in world science and medicine.

show abstract

“…In some cases, exposure of the dura is required and complications such as epidural hematoma, subdural hematoma, temporal lobe infarction and dural tears with cerebrospinal fluid leak can arise, although rare [4]- [6].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Device Fixation in Cochlear Implant Surgery: Bone Well vs. Subperiosteal Muscle Pocket Technique

Lauria¹,

Truzzi²,

Guimarães³

et al. 2015

OALib

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Cochlear implantation (CI) is a worldwide procedure that provides hearing rehabilitation and improves speech perception. One of the described complications is the device migration, which can result of failure of receiver-stimulator (R/S) fixation. This study aims to describe the outcomes of cochlear implant receiver-stimulator (RS) placement (bone well and the subperiosteral temporal pocket technique without fixation). Methods: A retrospective case review is developed in tertiary care university hospital center that compares the bone well and the subperiosteral temporal pocket technique without fixation in two periods (at the end of the surgery and one year after CI surgery). Results: The age range from 22 to 64 years (average of 41.2 year-old). Follow-up time ranges from 12 to 51 months (average 24 months). The patients, divided into two groups (subperiostal pocket = 6 patients and bone well = 3 patients), are analyzed through major and minor complications. No intraoperative wounds or intracranial complications have been observed in either group. Device migration occurs in three patients of subperiostal pocket group (50%), but with no apparent clinical outcomes. The migration measure is about not more than 1 up to 2 centimeters antero-inferiorly by the radiography evaluation. Conclusion: Device migration is more frequent in the subperioteal pocket group (50%) with statistical significance (p < 0.05). However it is not identified, apparently, no clinical and aesthetic account related to this situation.

show abstract

Hearing preservation and cochlear implants according to inner ear approach: multicentric evaluation

Abstract: The hearing preservation occurred in 89.4% of cases. There was no significant difference between the forms of inner ear approach.

Cited by 11 publications

References 24 publications

Dexamethasone Is One of the Factors Minimizing the Inner Ear Damage from Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implantation

Dexamethasone Is One of the Factors Minimizing the Inner Ear Damage from Electrode Insertion in Cochlear Implantation

Treatment of Partial Deafness: The Polish School in World Science

Device Fixation in Cochlear Implant Surgery: Bone Well vs. Subperiosteal Muscle Pocket Technique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About