Perkins, Elizabeth L.

Objective To evaluate cochlear implant speech perception among patients with sporadic inner ear schwannoma who underwent ipsilateral implantation. Study Design Retrospective multi-institutional cohort study. Setting Eleven tertiary academic medical centers across Germany, Denmark, and the United States. Patients One hundred six patients with sporadic inner ear schwannoma who received an ipsilateral cochlear implant from 2011 to 2022. Interventions Ipsilateral cochlear implantation with observation, stereotactic radiosurgery, or microsurgery for tumor management. Main Outcome Measures Monosyllabic speech perception testing scores and rates of open-set speech perception. Results Among 106 patients studied, 101 (95%) achieved open-set speech perception with a median of 24 months (interquartile range [IQR] 12–42 mo) of audiometric follow-up. Median ipsilateral monosyllabic speech perception testing achieved was 72% (IQR 54–85%), and median ipsilateral AzBio in quiet was 75% (IQR 46–90%). Most (91 of 106 [86%]) underwent microsurgery for tumor control, with cochlear implantation performed simultaneously in 98% (89 of 91) of these patients. The ability to achieve gross total resection significantly differed by tumor complexity, with 97% of low-complexity tumors, 100% of intermediate complexity, and 0% of high-complexity tumors undergoing gross total resection (p < 0.001). However, among patients managed with microsurgery, there was not a statistically significant difference in post-cochlear implantation monosyllabic speech perception scores across complexity groupings, with median scores of 75 and 70% for patients with tumors of low or intermediate complexity and those with tumors of high complexity, respectively (p = 0.5). Eight of 102 patients (8%) assessed experienced deterioration in cochlear implant performance over time. Among the subset of 39 patients with available MRI to review, the region of surveillance interest could be visualized postoperatively on MRI in all cases. Conclusions Open-set speech perception is achieved in most patients with inner ear schwannoma undergoing ipsilateral cochlear implantation. Although cochlear implantation in high-complexity inner ear schwannomas is only possible with incomplete tumor resection, long-term open-set speech perception outcomes are similar to lower-complexity tumors.

Objective To compare cochlear implant (CI) speech perception outcomes in patients with sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) managed with observation, radiosurgery, or microsurgery. Study Design Retrospective review. Setting Eleven tertiary academic medical centers. Patients One hundred patients with sporadic VS who received an ipsilateral CI. Interventions Ipsilateral cochlear implantation. Main Outcome Measures Pure-tone thresholds, monosyllabic speech perception testing scores, and rates of open-set speech acquisition. Results Of the 100 patients studied, 54 underwent microsurgery, 26 underwent radiosurgery, 19 continued observation, and 1 underwent multimodal therapy. Among all patients, the median post-implantation pure-tone average was 31 dB (interquartile range [IQR] 25–39 dB) and the median monosyllabic speech perception score was 30% (IQR 0–60%) at a median of 12 months (IQR 5–25 months) post-implantation. Patients who were managed with microsurgery (median speech perception score 11%, IQR 0–52%) exhibited poorer implant outcomes overall compared with those managed with observation (median speech perception score 52%, IQR 40–72%) or radiosurgery (median speech perception score 30%, IQR 16–60%). Open-set speech perception was achieved in 61% of patients managed with microsurgery, 100% with observation, and 80% with radiosurgery. In a multivariable setting, those managed with observation (p = 0.02) or who underwent radiosurgery (p = 0.04) were significantly more likely to achieve open-set speech perception compared with patients who underwent microsurgery. Conclusions Cochlear implants offer benefit in selected patients with sporadic VS. Although achieved in over half of people after microsurgery, open-set speech perception is more reliably attained in patients who are treated with observation or radiosurgery compared with microsurgical resection. These data may inform patient counseling and VS tumor management in people who may benefit from implantation.

Abstract Objective To evaluate the safety and outcomes of cochlear implantation (CI) in patients with ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts to inform clinical practice. Study Design Historical cohort study. Setting Tertiary referral centers. Methods A multi‐institutional historical cohort of patients with VP shunts and CI was identified and analyzed. Results A total of 46 patients (median age 8 years [interquratile range, IQR: 2‐46]) with VP shunts and CI were identified. Of these, 41 (89%) patients had a VP shunt prior to CI. Based on institutional preference and individual patient factors, CI was performed contralateral to a pre‐existing VP shunt in 24 of these 41 cases (59%) and ipsilateral in 17 (41%). Furthermore, pre‐CI relocation of the VP shunt was performed in 3 cases (7%), and 2 patients (5%) underwent planned revision of their VP shunt concurrent with CI. In total, 2 of 27 pediatric patients (7%) required unanticipated revision shunt surgery, both contralateral to CI device placement, given VP shunt malfunction. One of 19 adult patients (5%) required shunt revision during CI due to shunt damage noted intraoperatively. Among 43 patients with available follow‐up, 38 (88%) are regular CI users, with a median consonant‐nucleus vowel‐consonant word: score of 58% (IQR: 28‐72). Conclusion CI can be performed at low risk, either contralateral or ipsilateral, to a VP shunt, and does not mandate shunt revision in most cases. Additional considerations regarding CI receiver‐stimulator placement are necessary with programmable shunts to mitigate device interaction. Preoperative planning, including coordination of care with neurosurgery, is important to achieving optimal outcomes.

ObjectiveTo characterize the catchment area and patient profile of large cochlear implant (CI) centers in the United States.Study DesignMulti‐institutional retrospective case series.SettingTertiary referral CI centers.MethodsPatients who underwent CI surgery at 7 participating CI centers between 2015 and 2020 were identified. Patients’ residential zip codes were used to approximate travel distances and urban vs rural residential areas.ResultsOver the 6‐year study period (2015‐2020), 6313 unique CI surgical procedures occurred (4529 adult, 1784 pediatric). Between 2015 and 2019, CI procedures increased by 43%. Patients traveled a median 52 miles (interquartile range, 21‐110) each way; patients treated at rural CI centers traveled greater distances vs those treated at urban centers (72 vs 46 miles, P <. 001). Rural residents represented 61% of the patient population and traveled farther than urban residents (73 vs 24 miles, P <. 001). Overall, 91% of patients lived within a 200‐mile radius of the institution, while 71% lived within a 100‐mile radius. In adults, multiple regression analysis redemonstrated an association between greater travel distances and (1) older age at the time of CI and (2) residential rural setting (both P <. 001, r2 = 0.2).ConclusionsWhile large CI centers serve geographically dispersed populations, most patients reside within a 200‐mile radius. Strategies to expand CI utilization may leverage remote programming, telemedicine, and strategic placement of new centers and satellite clinics to ameliorate travel burden.