Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2018; 79(04): 343-348
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1608649
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Postoperative Cochlear Obliteration after Retrosigmoid Approach in Patients with Vestibular Schwannoma

Alireza Hedjrat
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Academic Hospital of the University of Marburg, Fulda, Germany
,
Konrad Schwager
2   Department of ENT, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Academic Hospital of the University of Marburg, Fulda, Germany
,
Erich Hofmann
3   Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Academic Hospital of the University of Marburg, Fulda, Germany
,
Robert Behr
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Academic Hospital of the University of Marburg, Fulda, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

26 April 2017

15 September 2017

Publication Date:
20 November 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Vestibular schwannomas (VSNs) account for the vast majority of lesions located in the cerebellopontine angle (CPA). The goals of VSN surgery are possible total tumor removal, intact facial nerve function, and preservation of cochlear nerve function. In cases of pre- or postoperative deafness, restoration of hearing with auditory brainstem implant (ABI) or cochlear implant (CI) is a promising treatment option with normally better results in CI than in ABI. The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate cochlear ossification or obliteration secondary to a retrosigmoid approach, which is important for later CI, especially in single-sided deafness.

Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed data from our suboccipital retrosigmoid operation database for the period from January 2008 to February 2015. A total of 65 patients with VSN could be analyzed retrospectively. The patient's data (age, gender, side of operation, tumor entities, and the duration of follow-up) were evaluated. The most recent T2-weigted MRI exams were taken into account for the evaluation of cochlea. To compare left and right sides, the coronal reformatted images were reconstructed in a symmetrical way.

Results Twenty-two out of 65 (33%) patients had cochlear obliteration in our survey. The cochlear obliteration was more common in females (44 vs. 20% in males). The median follow-up was 28 months. The size and the intrameatal extension of tumors could not be considered as factors influencing the cochlear obliteration rate.

According to our survey, 33% of suboccipital approaches manifested cochlear obliteration to some extent. It was more common in females. The intrameatal extension of tumors played statistically no role in the occurrence of postoperative cochlear obliteration. Whether the prohibition of cochlear ossification can be best achieved by retrosigmoid approaches, compared to other approaches to the CPA, or not could be a subject of future studies.

Keywords

vestibular schwannoma - CPA - tumor - cochlear obliteration - DRIVE-sequence - retrosigmoid approach - cochlear ossification - cochlear implant
 

  • References

  • 1 Belal Jr A, Linthicum Jr FH, House WF. Acoustic tumor surgery with preservation of hearing. A histopathologic report. Am J Otol 1982; 4 (01) 9-16
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Belal A. Is cochlear implantation possible after acoustic tumor removal?. Otol Neurotol 2001; 22 (04) 497-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Warren III FM, Kaylie DM, Aulino JM, Jackson CG, Weissman JL. Magnetic resonance appearance of the inner ear after hearing-preservation surgery. Otol Neurotol 2006; 27 (03) 393-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Behr R, Colletti V, Matthies C. , et al. New outcomes with auditory brainstem implants in NF2 patients. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35 (10) 1844-1851
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Carlson ML, Breen JT, Driscoll CL. , et al. Cochlear implantation in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2: variables affecting auditory performance. Otol Neurotol 2012; 33 (05) 853-862
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Trinh BT, Bergeron F, Ferron P. Long-term follow-up of cochlear implant users with ossified cochlea. J Otolaryngol 2000; 29 (05) 279-284
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sanna M, Khrais T, Guida M, Falcioni M. Auditory brainstem implant in a child with severely ossified cochlea. Laryngoscope 2006; 116 (09) 1700-1703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Colletti V, Fiorino FG, Carner M, Giarbini N, Sacchetto L, Cumer G. Advantages of the retrosigmoid approach in auditory brain stem implantation. Skull Base Surg 2000; 10 (04) 165-170
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Osborn HA, Yeung R, Lin VY. Delayed cochlear implantation after surgical labyrinthectomy. J Laryngol Otol 2012; 126 (01) 63-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Beutner C, Mathys C, Turowski B, Schipper J, Klenzner T. Cochlear obliteration after translabyrinthine vestibular schwannoma surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 272 (04) 829-833
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Isaacson B, Booth T, Kutz Jr JW, Lee KH, Roland PS. Labyrinthitis ossificans: how accurate is MRI in predicting cochlear obstruction?. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009; 140 (05) 692-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Beijen J, Casselman J, Joosten F. , et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with meningitis induced hearing loss. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 266 (08) 1229-1236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar