Citations

This Viewpoint discusses how recent discoveries surrounding the natural history of sporadic vestibular schwannoma provide data to support a shift in current management paradigms.

Objective In certain cases, clinicians may consider continued observation of a vestibular schwannoma after initial growth is detected. The aim of the current work was to determine if patients with growing sporadic vestibular schwannomas could be stratified by the likelihood of subsequent growth based on initial growth behavior. Study Design Slice-by-slice volumetric tumor measurements from 3,505 serial magnetic resonance imaging studies were analyzed from 952 consecutively treated patients. Setting Three tertiary-referral centers. Patients Adults with sporadic vestibular schwannoma. Interventions Wait-and-scan. Main Outcome Measures Composite end point of subsequent growth- or treatment-free survival rates, where growth is defined as an additional increase of at least 20% in tumor volume from the volume at the time of initial growth. Results Among 405 patients who elected continued observation despite documented growth, stratification, of volumetric growth rate into less than 25% (reference: n = 107), 25 to less than 50% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; p = 0.06; n = 96), 50 to less than 100% (HR, 1.71; p = 0.002; n = 112), and at least 100% (HR, 2.01; p < 0.001; n = 90) change per year predicted the likelihood of future growth or treatment. Subsequent growth- or treatment-free survival rates (95% confidence interval) at year 5 after detection of initial growth were 31% (21–44%) for those with less than 25% growth per year, 18% (10–32%) for those with 25 to less than 50%, 15% (9–26%) for those with 50 to less than 100%, and 6% (2–16%) for those with at least 100%. Neither patient age (p = 0.15) nor tumor volume at diagnosis (p = 0.95) significantly differed across stratification groups. Conclusions At the time of diagnosis, clinical features cannot consistently predict which tumors will ultimately display aggressive behavior. Stratification by volumetric growth rate at the time of initial growth results in a stepwise progression of increasing likelihood of subsequent growth. When considering continued observation after initial growth detection, almost 95% of patients who have tumors that double in volume between diagnosis and the first detection of growth demonstrate further tumor growth or undergo treatment if observed to 5 years.

Objectives The current study characterizes age and incidence of cochlear implantation among qualifying children with congenital bilateral profound hearing loss in the U.S. Study Design Deidentified cochlear implantation data were acquired from prospectively collected patient registries from two cochlear implant (CI) manufacturers (Cochlear Americas and Advanced Bionics). Children <36 months old were assumed to have congenital bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss. Setting U.S. CI centers. Patients Children <36 months old who received CIs. Interventions Cochlear implantation. Main Outcome Measures Age at implantation and incidence. Results A total of 4,236 children <36 months old underwent cochlear implantation from 2015 to 2019. The median age at implantation was 16 months (interquartile range, 12–24 mo) and did not change significantly during the 5-year study period (p = 0.09). Patients residing closer to CI centers (p = 0.03) and treated at higher-volume centers (p = 0.008) underwent implantation at a younger age. Bilateral simultaneous implantation increased from 38% to 53% of CI surgeries in 2015 and 2019, respectively. Children who received bilateral simultaneous CIs were younger compared with those receiving unilateral or bilateral sequential CIs (median, 14 versus 18 mo; p < 0.001). The incidence of cochlear implantation increased from 7,648 per 100,000 person-years in 2015 to 9,344 in 2019 (p < 0.001). Conclusion Although the incidence of pediatric CI recipients and the frequency of bilateral simultaneous implantation increased over the study period, age at implantation did not change significantly and far exceeded current Food and Drug Administration (9 mo) and American Academy of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery position statement (6–12 mo) guidelines.

Objective To describe the development, implementation, and validation of a radiology-administered protocol to obtain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with cochlear implants and auditory brainstem implants without magnet removal. Study Design Retrospective review and description of novel care pathway. Methods A radiology-administered protocol was designed based on careful input from the radiology safety committee and neurotology. Radiology technologist training modules, consent instructions, patient educational material, clinical audits, and other safeguards were implemented, with samples provided in this report. The primary outcomes measured included instances of magnet displacement during MRI and premature termination of MRI studies secondary to pain. Results Between June 19, 2018, and October 12, 2021, 301 implanted ears underwent MRI without magnet removal, including 153 devices housing diametric MRI-conditional magnets, and 148 implants with conventional axial (i.e., nondiametric) magnets. Among cases with diametric MRI-conditional magnets, all studies were completed without magnet dislodgement or need to terminate imaging early due to pain. Among cases with conventional axial (nondiametric) magnets, 29 (19.6%) MRI studies were stopped prematurely secondary to pain or discomfort; the overall rate of this event was 9.6% (29 of 301) among the entire study cohort. In addition, 6.1% (9 of 148) experienced confirmed magnet displacement despite headwrap placement; the overall rate among all cases was 3.0% (9 of 301). Eight of these patients received successful external magnet reseating through manual pressure on the external scalp without surgery, and one required surgical replacement of the magnet in the operating room. There were no documented instances of hematoma, infection, device or magnet extrusion, internal device movement (i.e., gross receiver-stimulator migration), or device malfunction in this cohort related to MRI. Conclusions We present the successful implementation of a radiology-administered protocol designed to streamline care for cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant recipients who require MRI and ease clinical demands for otolaryngology providers. Examples of resources developed, including a process map, radiology training modules, consent instructions, patient educational materials, clinical audit, and other procedural safety measures are provided so interested groups may consider adapting and implementing related measures according to need.

Objectives To investigate the associations of age and year of cochlear implantation (CI) with CI incidence among adults 20 years and older residing in the US. Study Design Deidentified cochlear implant data were acquired from prospective patient registries from two cochlear implant manufacturers (Cochlear Americas and Advanced Bionics), which supply an estimated 85% of cochlear implants in the US. Population estimates for severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss by age group were extracted from Census and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. Setting US CI centers. Patients Adults 20 years and older who underwent CI. Interventions CI. Main Outcome Measures CI incidence. Results The study cohort included 30,066 adults 20 years and older who underwent CI from 2015 to 2019. When combining actual and estimated data from all three manufacturers, the annual number of cochlear implants increased 5,406 in 2015 to 8,509 in 2019. Overall, the incidence of CI among adult traditional (bilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss) CI candidates increased from 244 per 100,000 person-years in 2015 to 350 in 2019 (p < 0.001). Although the elderly (80 years and older) population had the lowest incidence of CI, this cohort experienced the largest growth from an incidence of 105 per 100,000 person-years to 202 during the study period. Conclusions Despite growing incidence among those with qualifying hearing loss, cochlear implants remain widely underutilized. Elderly adults continue to exhibit the lowest relative cochlear implant utilization rates; however, trends over the last half-decade suggest a shift has occurred, resulting in improved access among this underserved subset.