Saoji, Aniket A.

Objective To compare cochlear implant (CI) and auditory brainstem implant (ABI) performance in patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis (NF2) Study Design Historical cohort. Setting Tertiary academic center. Patients A total of 58 devices among 48 patients were studied, including 27 ABIs implanted from 1997 to 2022 and 31 CIs implanted from 2003 to 2022. Three patients had bilateral ABIs, three had bilateral CIs, three had an ABI on one side and a CI on the other, one had a CI that was later replaced with an ipsilateral ABI, and one had an ABI and CI concurrently on the same side. Interventions CI or ABI ipsilateral to vestibular schwannoma. Main Outcome Measures Open-set speech perception, consonant-nucleus-consonant word scores, and AzBio sentence in quiet scores. Results Among all patients, 27 (47%) achieved open-set speech perception, with 35 (61%) daily users at a median of 24 months (interquartile range [IQR], 12–87 mo) after implantation. Comparing outcomes, CIs significantly outperformed ABIs; 24 (77%) CIs achieved open-set speech perception compared with 3 (12%) ABIs, with median consonant-nucleus-consonant and AzBio scores of 31% (IQR, 0–52%) and 57% (IQR, 5–83%), respectively, for CIs, compared with 0% (IQR, 0–0%) and 0% (IQR, 0–0%), respectively, for ABIs. Patients with ABIs were younger at diagnosis and at implantation, had larger tumors, and were more likely to have postoperative facial paresis. Conclusion Many patients with NF2-associated vestibular schwannoma achieved auditory benefit with either a CI or an ABI; however, outcomes were significantly better in those patients who were able to receive a CI. When disease and anatomy permit, hearing rehabilitation with a CI should be considered over an ABI in these patients. Tumor management strategies that increase the ability to successfully use CIs should be strongly considered given the high risk of losing bilateral functional acoustic hearing in this population.

AbstractObjectiveComprehensively assess the prevalence of monopolar electrosurgery‐related device complications among cochlear implant (CI) recipients.Study DesignMultifaceted retrospective review and survey.SettingTertiary medical center.MethodsMultifaceted approach including: (i) review of the current literature; (ii) historical review of institutional data from an academic, tertiary CI center; (iii) review of industry data provided by 3 Food and Drug Administration‐approved CI manufacturers; and (iv) survey of high‐volume CI centers.ResultsLiterature review identified 9 human studies, detailing 84 devices with 199 episodes of device‐cautery exposure. From studies reporting on patients records, no implant showed evidence of damage after exposure. One cadaveric study using dental cautery reported 1 episode of device damage. Review of institutional records did not identify any CI damage in 84 instances of exposure. Data from the 3 major implant manufacturers showed a single report of damage that could be reasonably linked to monopolar electrosurgery, out of a possible 689,426 CIs. Last, a survey of 8 high‐volume CI centers did not identify any adverse events associated with monopolar cautery.ConclusionThese data estimate the risk of adverse device‐related events or tissue injury to be extraordinarily low. Short of operating in immediate proximity to the CI (ie, the ipsilateral temporoparietal scalp), these data indicate that monopolar electrosurgery can be used in the body and the head‐and‐neck of CI recipients with nominal risk. These findings may guide decision‐making in cases that are optimally or preferably performed with monopolar electrocautery and can be used to counsel CI patients following inadvertent exposures.

Introduction: Cochlear implantation has become the standard of care for the treatment of moderate-to-profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. However, current technologies, all of which rely on an external sound processor, have intrinsic limitations that prevent certain activities and diagnostics, thus hampering full integration into a patient’s lifestyle. The Envoy Medical (White Bear Lake, MN, USA) Acclaim® fully implanted cochlear implant is a new device currently undergoing testing that has been designed to alleviate many of the current constraints by housing all components within the patient, thus allowing for near-constant use in many environments that are not conducive to a traditional cochlear implant. Methods: As part of an Early Feasibility Study, three adult implant candidates were implanted with the Acclaim® cochlear implant. Surgical video and photography were taken, and initial observations were recorded. Implantation with the Acclaim® device is largely similar to a traditional cochlear implant, with modifications to allow room for the implanted sensor as well as the implantation of a battery in the subcutaneous tissues of the chest. Results: This study demonstrates a step-by-step overview of implanting the Acclaim® and discusses initial insight and experiences with the first three implantations with this new device. Conclusions: All three surgeries proceeded without complication, and at activation, all three patients were hearing through their devices. Surgery is more technically challenging compared to a standard cochlear implant, but the skills needed can all be mastered by a dedicated otologic surgeon.

Objective Compare cochlear implant (CI) performance between patients with ipsilateral sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS) and NF2-related schwannomatosis (NF2). Compare CI performance according to VS management modality. Study Design Historical cohort. Setting Tertiary academic center. Patients Forty-nine patients (52 ears) undergoing cochlear implantation in the setting of ipsilateral sporadic (n = 21) or NF2-associated VS (n = 28). Interventions CI ipsilateral to VS. Main Outcome Measures Auditory thresholds, consonant–nucleus–consonant (CNC) word scores, and AzBio sentences in quiet scores. Results Among all patients, median post-CI pure tone average was 28 dB HL (interquartile range [IQR], 21–38), CNC word score was 39% (IQR, 6–62), and AzBio sentences in quiet score was 60% (IQR, 11–83) at a median of 12.5 months postimplantation. Despite the NF2 cohort having larger tumors, when comparing patients with sporadic versus NF2-associated VS, there were no statistically significant differences in CNC word (49% [30–70] vs. 31% [0–52]) or AzBio sentences in quiet (66% [28–80] vs. 57% [5–83]) scores. Regardless of NF2 status, all patients managed with observation, and radiosurgery achieved open-set speech. In patients who underwent microsurgery, 6 (46%) of 13 with NF2 achieved open-set speech recognition compared with 4 (67%) of 6 with sporadic disease. Conclusion Select patients with VS achieve successful hearing rehabilitation with a CI. In this cohort, tumor management strategy significantly influenced CI performance, whereas differences in NF2 status exhibited less effect. Specifically, all patients managed with observation or radiosurgery achieved open-set speech perception, whereas approximately half of people with NF2-related VS and two-thirds of people with sporadic VS achieved this outcome after tumor microsurgery. When disease permits, observation and radiosurgery should be considered in patients who may later pursue a CI.

Intraoperative electrocochleography (ECOG) is performed using a single low-frequency acoustic stimulus (e.g., 500 Hz) to monitor cochlear microphonics (CM) during cochlear implant (CI) electrode insertion. A decrease in CM amplitude is commonly associated with cochlear trauma and is used to guide electrode placement. However, advancement of the recording electrode beyond the sites of CM generation can also lead to a decrease in CM amplitude and is sometimes interpreted as cochlear trauma, resulting in unnecessary electrode manipulation and increased risk of cochlear trauma during CI electrode placement. In the present study, multi-frequency ECOG was used to monitor CM during CI electrode placement. The intraoperative CM tracings were compared with electrode scan measurements, where CM was measured for each of the intracochlear electrodes. Comparison between the peak CM amplitude measured during electrode placement and electrode scan measurements was used to differentiate between different mechanisms for decrease in CM amplitude during CI electrode insertion. Analysis of the data shows that both multi-frequency electrocochleography and electrode scan could potentially be used to differentiate between different mechanisms for decreasing CM amplitude and providing appropriate feedback to the surgeon during CI electrode placement.

OBJECTIVE Facial nerve function, hearing preservation, and tumor control have been the primary benchmarks used to assess vestibular schwannoma (VS) outcomes. Acknowledging the frequent discrepancy between what physicians prioritize and what patients value, there has been increasing prioritization of patient-reported outcome measures when evaluating the impact of VS diagnosis and its treatment. Motivated by reported limitations of prior instruments used to assess quality of life (QOL) in patients with VS, the authors describe the development and validation of a new disease-specific QOL measure: the Vestibular Schwannoma Quality of Life (VSQOL) Index. METHODS The content development phase comprised identification of clinically important domains and prioritization of feelings or concerns individuals with VS may have. The validation phase encompassed determining how items were grouped into domains and eliminating redundant items. Both phases leveraged data from cross-sectional and longitudinal surveys, expertise from a multidisciplinary working group, and patients with a broad range of experiences with VS (n = 42 during content development and n = 263 during validation). Domain scores from the new instrument were assessed for reliability and correlation with other measures of similar constructs. RESULTS The VSQOL Index consists of 40 items that evaluate the impact of VS diagnosis and its management on QOL, treatment satisfaction, and employment and is estimated to take 8–10 minutes to complete. Domain scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) and demonstrate excellent psychometric properties, including content, construct, and convergent validity and both internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas 0.83 to 0.91) and test-retest reliability (reliability coefficients 0.86 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS The VSQOL Index is a valid and reliable measure that overcomes several limitations of prior instruments, including omission or underrepresentation of domains that frequently impact well-being, such as pain, cognition, satisfaction or regret surrounding treatment decisions, and occupational limitations, to comprehensively evaluate the impact of VS diagnosis or its treatment on QOL.

Background and Purpose After cochlear implantation, metallic artifact can obscure nearby structures on CT images, which is problematic in patients with facial nerve stimulation (FNS). This study evaluated the usefulness of co-registered pre- and post-operative examinations to evaluate the cochlear implant and adjacent structures. Materials and Methods A retrospective review was completed of consecutive patients that underwent CT imaging of the temporal bone before and after placement of a cochlear implant. Two blinded neuroradiologists independently reviewed all available examinations. All examinations were assessed for the presence or absence of dehiscence of the osseous ridge between the cochlea and facial nerve canal (FNC). Pre-operative and fused pre- and post-operative examinations were compared in their ability to visualize the osseous ridge using a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = unfused images were substantially superior to 5 = fused images were substantially superior). The electrode closest to the FNC were noted. Results Of 34 included patients, 13 (38.2%) were female and 21 (61.8%) were male; average age was 72.2. Seven patients (20.6%) had frank dehiscence between the cochlea and FNC. Fused images were superior to the post-operative study alone for assessing the integrity of the osseous partition between the cochlea and FNC and for reducing artifact from the electrode array (average Likert scores for both reviewers were 4.4 and 4.7). There was good agreement between reviewers in noting electrode closest to the FNC (concordance correlation coefficient=0.82). Conclusions Following cochlear implantation, co-registered pre- and post-operative CT images are superior to conventional images in assessing the anatomic relationship between the cochlea and FNC.

Objective To introduce and discuss implementation strategy for the Complete Cochlear Implant Care (CCIC) model, a highly-coordinated cochlear implant (CI) care delivery model requiring a single on-site visit for preoperative workup, surgery, and postoperative programming. Study Design Prospective, nonrandomized, two-arm clinical trial. Setting Tertiary referral CI center. Patients Adults who meet audiologic criteria for cochlear implantation. Interventions Cochlear implantation, coordinated care delivery, including remote programming. Main outcome measures Care delivery model feasibility and process implementation. Results Patients determined to be likely CI candidates based on routine audiometry are eligible for enrollment. The CCIC model uses telemedicine and electronic educational materials to prepare patients for same-day on-site consultation with CI surgery, same or next-day activation, and postoperative remote programming for 12 months. Implementation challenges include overcoming inertia related to the implementation of a new clinical workflow, whereas scalability of the CCIC model is limited by current hardware requirements for remote programming technology. A dedicated CCIC process coordinator is critical for overcoming obstacles in implementation and process improvement through feedback and iterative changes. Team and patient-facing materials are included and should be tailored to fit each unique CI program looking to implement CCIC. Conclusion The CCIC model has the potential to dramatically streamline hearing healthcare delivery. Implementation requires an adaptive approach, as obstacles may vary according to institutional infrastructure and policies.

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.