Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-h8lrw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T09:24:10.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simultaneous cochlear implantation and removal of acoustic neuroma: implications for hearing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 June 2020

S Roberts ,
B Levin ,
H Sanli ,
R Ferch ,
K Kong  and
R Eisenberg
S Roberts*
Affiliation:
Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, University of Newcastle, Australia
B Levin
Affiliation:
ENT Clinics Sydney, Australia
H Sanli
Affiliation:
Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia
R Ferch
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia
K Kong
Affiliation:
Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia University of New South Wales Rural Clinical School, Wagga Wagga, Australia
R Eisenberg
Affiliation:
Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Samuel Roberts, Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, NSW 2305, Australia E-mail: samueltomroberts@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To present our data evaluating the feasibility of simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma.

Methods

This paper describes a case series of eight adult patients with a radiologically suspected acoustic neuroma, treated at a tertiary referral centre in Newcastle, Australia, between 2012 and 2015. Patients underwent cochlear implantation concurrently with removal of an acoustic neuroma. The approach was translabyrinthine, with facial nerve monitoring and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response testing. Standard post-implant rehabilitation was employed, with three and six months’ follow-up data collected. The main outcome measures were: hearing, subjective benefit of implant, operative complications and tumour recurrence.

Results

Eight patients underwent simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma over a 3-year period, and had 25–63 months’ follow up. There were no major complications. All patients except one gained usable hearing and were daily implant users.

Conclusion

Simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma has been shown to be a safe treatment option, which will be applicable in a wide range of clinical scenarios as the indications for cochlear implantation continue to expand.

Keywords

Acoustic NeuromaCochlear ImplantsIntraoperative MonitoringCochlear NerveDeafness

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 134 , Issue 6 , June 2020 , pp. 519 - 525
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Dr S Roberts takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

Preliminary results of this paper were presented at: the Australian Society of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery meeting, 29 March – 3 April 2014, Sydney, Australia; the 7th International Conference on Acoustic Neuroma, 12 – 15 April 2015, Shanghai, China; and the Asia Pacific Symposium on Cochlear Implants and Related Sciences, 30 April – 3 May 2015, Beijing, China.

References

Bakkouri, W, Romain, E, Guichard, J, Lot, G, Herman, P, Huy, P. Conservative management of 386 cases of unilateral vestibular schwannoma: tumour growth and consequences of treatment. J Neurosurg 2009;110:662–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vernooij, MW, Ikram, MA, Tanghe, HL, Vincent, AJ, Hofman, A, Krestin, GP. Incidental findings on brain MRI in the general population. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1821–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tran Ba Huy, P, Kania, R, Frachet, B, Poncet, C, Legac, MS. Auditory rehabilitation with cochlear implantation in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2. Acta Otolaryngol 2009;129:971–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neff, BA, Wiet, RM, Lasak, JM, Cohen, NL, Pillsbury, HC, Ramsden, RT et al. Cochlear implantation in the neurofibromatosis type 2 patient: long-term follow-up. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1069–72CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aristegui, M, Denia, A. Simultaneous cochlear implantation and translabyrinthine removal of vestibular schwannoma in an only hearing ear: report of two cases (neurofibromatosis type 2 and unilateral vestibular schwannoma). Otol Neurotol 2005;26:205–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahsan, S, Telischi, F, Hodges, A, Balkany, T. Cochlear implantation concurrent with translabyrinthine acoustic neuroma resection. Laryngoscope 2003;113:472–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
North, HJD, Mawman, D, O'Driscoll, M, Freeman, SR, Rutherford, SA, King, AT et al. Outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2. Cochlear Implants Int 2016;17:172–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanna, M, Sozzi, V, Medina, MD, Prasad, SC, Macak, A, Rossi, G. Vestibular schwannoma resection with ipsilateral simultaneous cochlear implantation in patients with normal contralateral hearing. Audiol Neurotol 2016;21:286–95CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Archbold, S, Lutman, M, Nikolopoulos, T. Categories of auditory performance: inter-user reliability. Br J Audiol 1998;32:7–12CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smouha, E, Yoo, M, Mohr, K, Davis, R. Conservative management of acoustic neuroma: a meta-analysis and proposed treatment algorithm. Laryngoscope 2005;115:450–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sughrue, ME, Kane, A, Kaur, R, Barry, J, Rutkowski, B, Pitts, LH et al. A prospective study of hearing preservation in untreated vestibular schwannomas. J Neurosurg 2011;114:381–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matsunaga, T, Kanzaki, J. Morphological evidence that impaired intraneural microcirculation is a possible mechanism of eighth nerve conduction block in acoustic neuromas. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2000;257:412–17CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Badie, B, Pyle, GM, Nguyen, PH, Hadar, EJ. Elevation of internal auditory canal pressure by vestibular schwannomas. Otol Neurotol 2001;22:696–700CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roosli, C, Linthicum, FH Jr, Cureoglu, S, Merchant, SN. Dysfunction of the cochlea contributing to hearing loss in acoustic neuromas: an underappreciated entity. Otol Neurotol 2012;33:473–80CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kari, E, Friedman, RA. Hearing preservation: microsurgery. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012;20:358–66CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yong, RL, Westerberg, BD, Dong, C, Akagami, R. Length of tumor-cochlear nerve contact and hearing outcome after surgery for vestibular schwannoma. J Neurosurg 2008;108:105–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wanibuchi, M, Fukushima, T, McElveen, JT Jr, Friedman, AH. Hearing preservation in surgery for large vestibular schwannomas. J Neurosurg 2009;111:845–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, C, Bischoff, B, Romstock, J, Rachinger, J, Rampp, S, Prell, J et al. Hearing preservation in medial vestibular schwannomas. J Neurosurg 2008;109:70–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowed, DW, Nedzelski, JM. Hearing preservation in the removal of intracanalicular acoustic neuromas via the retrosigmoid approach. J Neurosurg 1997;86:456–61CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samii, M, Gerganov, V, Samii, A. Improved preservation of hearing and facial nerve function in vestibular schwannoma surgery via the retrosigmoid approach in a series of 200 patients. J Neurosurg 2006;105:527–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colletti, V, Fiorino, FG. Vulnerability of hearing function during acoustic neuroma surgery. Acta Otolaryngol 1994;114:264–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sasaki, T, Shono, T, Hashiguchi, K, Yoshida, F, Suzuki, SO. Histological considerations of the cleavage plane for preservation of facial and cochlear nerve functions in vestibular schwannoma surgery. J Neurosurg 2009;110:648–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belal, A. Is cochlear implantation possible after acoustic tumor removal? Otol Neurotol 2001;22:497–500CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oh, T, Nagasawa, DT, Fong, BM, Trang, A, Gopen, Q, Parsa, AT et al. Intraoperative neuromonitoring techniques in the surgical management of acoustic neuromas. Neurosurg Focus 2012;33:E6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walton, J, Gibson, W, Sanli, H, Prelog, K. Predicting cochlear implant outcomes in children with auditory neuropathy. Otol Neurotol 2008;29:302–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yuen, H-W, Bodmer, D, Smilsky, K, Nedzelski, J, Chen, J. Management of single-sided deafness with the bone-anchored hearing aid. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;141:16–23CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hol, MK, Bosman, AJ, Snik, AF, Mylanus, EA, Cremers, CW. Bone-anchored hearing aid in unilateral inner ear deafness: a study of 20 patients. Audiol Neurotol 2004;9:274–8110.1159/000080227CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bichey, B, Miyamoto, R. Outcomes in bilateral cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2008;138:655–61CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buechner, A, Brendel, M, Lesinki-Schiedat, A, Wenzel, G, Frohne-Buechner, C, Jaeger, B et al. Cochlear implantation in unilateral deaf subjects associated with ipsilateral tinnitus. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:1381–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kitterick, P, O'Donoghue, G, Edmondson-Jones, M, Marshall, A, Jeffs, E, Craddock, L et al. Comparison of the benefits of cochlear implantation versus contra-lateral routing of signal hearing aids in adult patients with single-sided deafness: study protocol for a prospective within-subject longitudinal trial. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord 2014;14:7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hassepass, F, Arndt, S, Aschendorff, A, Laszig, R, Wesarg, T. Cochlear implantation for hearing rehabilitation in single-sided deafness after translabyrinthine vestibular schwannoma surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273:2373–83CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hulka, GF, Bernard, EJ, Pillsbury, HC. Cochlear implantation in a patient after removal of an acoustic neuroma. The implications of magnetic resonance imaging with gadolinium on patient management. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;121:465–8Google Scholar
Lloyd, SKW, Glynn, FJ, Rutherford, SA, King, AT, Mawman, D, O'Driscoll, M et al. Ipsilateral cochlear implantation after cochlear nerve preserving vestibular schwannoma surgery in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2. Otol Neurotol 2014;35:43–51CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rooth, MA, Dillon, MT, Brown, KD. Prospective evaluation of patients undergoing translabyrinthine excision of vestibular schwannoma with concurrent cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2017;38:1512–16CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lella, FD, Merkus, P, Trapani, GD, Taibah, A, Guida, M, Sanna, M. Vestibular schwannoma in the only hearing ear: role of cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2013;122:91–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mukherjee, P, Ramsden, J, Donnelly, N, Axon, PR, Saeed, S, Fagan, P. Cochlear implants used to treat deafness caused by vestibular schwannomas. Otol Neurotol 2013;34:1291–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, F, Tysome, JR, Donnelly, N, Durie-Gair, J, Crundwell, G, Tam, YC et al. Cochlear implants in the management of hearing loss in neurofibromatosis type 2. Cochlear Implants Int 2017;18:171–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlson, ML, Neff, BA, Sladen, DP, Link, MJ, Driscoll, CL. Cochlear implantation in patients with intracochlear and intralabyrinthine schwannomas. Otol Neurotol 2016;37:647–53CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crane, B, Gottschalk, B, Kraut, M, Aygun, N, Niparko, J. Magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T after cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2010;31:1215–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, WD, Youssefzadeh, S, Hamzavi, J, Czerny, C, Gstoettner, W. Clinical application of magnetic resonance imaging in 30 cochlear implant patients. Otol Neurotol 2001;22:818–22CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed