Dataset Information

Management of transmodiolar and transmacular cochleovestibular schwannomas with and without cochlear implantation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Hearing rehabilitation with cochlear implants has attracted increasing interest also for patients with cochleovestibular schwannoma. The authors report their experience with the surgical management of tumors with rare transmodiolar or transmacular extension and outcomes after cochlear implantation (CI).

Methods

This retrospective case series included nine patients with either primary intralabyrinthine tumors or secondary invasion of the inner ear from the internal auditory canal. The primary endpoint with CI, performed in six patients, was word recognition score at 65?dB SPL (sound pressure level). Secondary endpoints were intra- and postoperative electrophysiological parameters, impedance measures, the presence of a wave V in the electrically evoked (via the CI) auditory brainstem responses, the specifics of postoperative CI programming, and adverse events.

Results

Hearing rehabilitation with CI in cases of transmodiolar tumor growth could be achieved only with incomplete tumor removal, whereas tumors with transmacular growth could be completely removed. All six patients with CI had good word recognition scores for numbers in quiet conditions (80-100% at 65?dB SPL, not later than 6 to 12 months post CI activation). Four of these six patients achieved good to very good results for monosyllabic words within 1-36 months (65-85% at 65?dB SPL). The two other patients, however, had low scores for monosyllables at 6 months (25 and 15% at 65?dB SPL, respectively) with worsening of results thereafter.

Conclusions

Cochleovestibular schwannomas with transmodiolar and transmacular extension represent a rare entity with specific management requirements. Hearing rehabilitation with CI is a principal option in these patients.

SUBMITTER: Plontke SK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7862215 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Management of transmodiolar and transmacular cochleovestibular schwannomas with and without cochlear implantation.

Plontke S K SK Caye-Thomasen P P Strauss C C Kösling S S Götze G G Siebolts U U Vordermark D D Wagner L L Fröhlich L L Rahne T T

HNO 20210101 Suppl 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>Hearing rehabilitation with cochlear implants has attracted increasing interest also for patients with cochleovestibular schwannoma. The authors report their experience with the surgical management of tumors with rare transmodiolar or transmacular extension and outcomes after cochlear implantation (CI).<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective case series included nine patients with either primary intralabyrinthine tumors or secondary invasion of the inner ear from the internal aud ...[more]

PMID: 33044580

Similar Datasets

Project description:The benefits of cochlear implantation for children with developmental delays (DD) often are unclear. We compared cognition, adaptive behavior, familial stress, and communication in children with and without DD.Retrospective review.Two tertiary care pediatric hospitals.Two hundred four children who underwent cochlear implantation assessed before and more than 1 year after implantation.The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL), vineland adaptive behavior scales (VABS), Parental Stress Index, and Preschool Language Scale.We developed a specific definition of DD for hearing-impaired children based upon diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fourth edition, criteria for mental retardation; 60 children met the criteria for DD, and 144 children did not. Before implantation, multiple linear regression demonstrated that children with DD had lower scores in every domain of the MSEL and VABS (p < 0.05), but no differences in any domains of the parental stress index and preschool language scale (p > 0.1) compared with children without DD. After implantation, children without DD demonstrated significant improvements in intelligence as measured by the MSEL and age-appropriate improvements in adaptive behavior as evaluated by the VABS, and their familial stress levels were not increased after cochlear implantation. In contrast, children with DD underwent implantation at a later age and demonstrated less comprehensive developmental improvements after cochlear implantation and higher stress levels. However, when the age differences were taken into account using multiple linear regression analyses, the differences between the 2 cohorts were reduced.These data indicate that our definition of DD is a reliable method of stratifying deaf children. Although children with DD have a normal developmental rate of adaptive behavior after cochlear implantation, their developmental rate of intelligence is lower, and they have higher stress levels than children without DD. However, our data suggest that if children with DD could be implanted as early as children without DD, their intelligence and stress outcomes would be improved.

Project description:BackgroundSensorineural hearing loss occurs as a result of damage to the hair cells in the cochlea, or to the auditory nerve. It negatively affects learning and development in children, and employment and economic attainment in adults. Current policy in Ontario is to provide unilateral cochlear implantation for patients with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. However, hearing with both ears as a result of bilateral cochlear implantation may offer added benefits.MethodsWe completed a health technology assessment, which included an evaluation of clinical benefits and harms, value for money, budget impact, and patient preferences related to bilateral cochlear implantation. We performed a systematic literature search for studies on bilateral cochlear implantation in adults and children from inception to March 2017. We conducted a cost-utility analysis with a lifetime horizon from a public payer perspective and analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding bilateral cochlear implantation in adults and children in Ontario for the next 5 years. Finally, we conducted interviews with adults who have sensorineural hearing loss and unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants, and with parents of children with bilateral cochlear implants.ResultsWe included 24 publications (10 in adults, 14 in children) in the clinical evidence review. Compared with unilateral cochlear implantation, bilateral cochlear implantation improved sound localization, speech perception in noise, and subjective benefits of hearing in adults and children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss (GRADE: moderate to high). Bilateral cochlear implantation also allowed for better language development and more vocalization in preverbal communication in children (GRADE: moderate). The safety profile was acceptable.Bilateral cochlear implantation was more expensive and more effective than unilateral cochlear implantation. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $48,978/QALY in adults and between $27,427/QALY and $30,386/QALY in children. Cost-effectiveness was highly dependent on the quality-of-life values used. We estimated that the net budget impact of publicly funding bilateral cochlear implantation for adults in Ontario would be between $510,000 and $780,000 per year for the next 5 years.Patients described the social and emotional effects of hearing loss, and the benefits and challenges of using cochlear implants.ConclusionsBased on evidence of moderate to high quality, we found that bilateral cochlear implantation improved hearing in adults and children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Bilateral cochlear implantation was potentially cost-effective compared to unilateral cochlear implantation in adults and children. Patients with sensorineural hearing loss reported the positive effects of cochlear implants, and patients with unilateral cochlear implants generally expressed a desire for bilateral implants.

Project description:Cochlear implantation (CI) has become the mainstay of treatment for children with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Yet, despite mounting evidence of the clinical benefits of early implantation, little data are available on the long-term societal benefits and comparative effectiveness of this procedure across various ages of implantation-a choice parameter for parents and clinicians with high prognostic value for clinical outcome. As such, the aim of the present study is to evaluate a model of the consequences of the timing of this intervention from a societal economic perspective. Average cost utility of pediatric CI by age at intervention will be analyzed.Prospective, longitudinal assessment of health utility and educational placement outcomes in 175 children recruited from six U.S. centers between November 2002 and December 2004, who had severe-to-profound SNHL onset within 1 year of age, underwent CI before 5 years of age, and had up to 6 years of postimplant follow-up that ended in November 2008 to December 2011. Costs of care were collected retrospectively and stratified by preoperative, operative, and postoperative expenditures. Incremental costs and benefits of implantation were compared among the three age groups and relative to a nonimplantation baseline.Children implanted at <18 months of age gained an average of 10.7 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over their projected lifetime as compared with 9.0 and 8.4 QALYs for those implanted between 18 and 36 months and at >36 months of age, respectively. Medical and surgical complication rates were not significantly different among the three age groups. In addition, mean lifetime costs of implantation were similar among the three groups, at approximately $2000/child/year (77.5-year life expectancy), yielding costs of $14,996, $17,849, and $19,173 per QALY for the youngest, middle, and oldest implant age groups, respectively. Full mainstream classroom integration rate was significantly higher in the youngest group at 81% as compared with 57 and 63% for the middle and oldest groups, respectively (p < 0.05) after 6 years of follow-up. After incorporating lifetime educational cost savings, CI led to net societal savings of $31,252, $10,217, and $6,680 for the youngest, middle, and oldest groups at CI, respectively, over the child's projected lifetime.Even without considering improvements in lifetime earnings, the overall cost-utility results indicate highly favorable ratios. Early (<18 months) intervention with CI was associated with greater and longer quality-of-life improvements, similar direct costs of implantation, and economically valuable improved classroom placement, without a greater incidence of medical and surgical complications when compared to CI at older ages.

Dataset Information

Management of transmodiolar and transmacular cochleovestibular schwannomas with and without cochlear implantation.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Management of transmodiolar and transmacular cochleovestibular schwannomas with and without cochlear implantation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets