Imaging evaluation of sensorineural hearing loss

Cochlear Implantation: Systematic Approach to Preoperative Radiologic Evaluation

Sensorineural hearing loss results from abnormalities that affect the hair cells of the membranous labyrinth, inner ear malformations, and conditions affecting the auditory pathway from the cochlear nerve to the processing centers of the brain. Cochlear implantation is increasingly being performed for hearing rehabilitation owing to expanding indications and a growing number of children and adults with sensorineural hearing loss. An adequate understanding of the temporal bone anatomy and diseases that affect the inner ear is paramount for alerting the operating surgeon about variants and imaging findings that can influence the surgical technique, affect the choice of cochlear implant and electrode type, and help avoid inadvertent complications. In this article, imaging protocols for sensorineural hearing loss and the normal inner ear anatomy are reviewed, with a brief description of cochlear implant devices and surgical techniques. In addition, congenital inner ear malformations and acquired causes of sensorineural hearing loss are discussed, with a focus on imaging findings that may affect surgical planning and outcomes. The anatomic factors and variations that are associated with surgical challenges and may predispose patients to periprocedural complications also are highlighted. ^© RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center. Online supplemental material and the slide presentation from the RSNA Annual Meeting are available for this article.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss (Update)

OBJECTIVE

Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently but not universally accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged ≥18 years and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients.

METHODS

Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's "Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition" (Rosenfeld et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;148[1]:S1-S55), the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key Action Statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated.

RESULTS

The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: (KAS 1) Clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss. (KAS 7) Clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy. (KAS 13) Clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiologic rehabilitation and other supportive measures. These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendations against the following: (KAS 3) Clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 5) Clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 11) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: (KAS 2) Clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings. (KAS 4) In patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 6) Clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response. (KAS 10) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms. (KAS 12) Clinicians should obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment. These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry and method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 8) Clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset. (KAS 9a) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 9b) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

DIFFERENCES FROM PRIOR GUIDELINE

Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that >90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the KASs from the original guideline: KAS 1-When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2-The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3-The word "routine" is added to clarify that this statement addresses nontargeted head computerized tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans, such as temporal bone computerized tomography scan, to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4-The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5-New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6-Audiometric follow-up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, and, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7-The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8-The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9-Changed to KAS 9A and 9B. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9A) or salvage therapy (9B). The timing of initial therapy is within 2 weeks of onset, and that of salvage therapy is within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 10-Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11-Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12-Follow-up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13-This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in same.

DTI study on rehabilitation of the congenital deafness auditory pathway and speech center by cochlear implantation

PURPOSE

To explore the correlation between hearing and speech recovery levels after cochlear implantation and examined the preoperative microstructure of auditory pathways and speech centre using DTI.

METHODS

(1) Fifty-two SNHL children between 0 and 6 years and 19 age and gender matched normal hearing subjects had received 3.0 T-MRI examination of the brain.FA, axial diffusion coefficient (λ_‖), radial diffusion coefficient (λ_⊥), and MD values in the lateral lemniscus, inferior colliculus, medial geniculate bodies, auditory radiations, Brodmann areas 41, 42, 22, 44, 45, and 39 were all measured bilaterally. (2) CAP and SIR scores were assessed in fourty-six cochlear implantation children at 6 months post-implant. Correlations among deaf children ages, FA value of bilateral inferior colliculus FA values, BA22, BA44, and postoperative CAP, and SIR scores were analyzed using multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

The preoperative standard partial regression age coefficient of deaf children (|bi'| = 0.404) was slightly greater than that of the inferior colliculus (|bi'| = 0.377) FA value.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative children ages and inferior colliculus FA values were important factors influencing postoperative CAP score. Inferior colliculus FA value is a vital influencing factor in rehabilitation after cochlear implantation.

Visualization of human inner ear anatomy with high-resolution MR imaging at 7T: initial clinical assessment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In many centers, MR imaging of the inner ear and auditory pathway performed on 1.5T or 3T systems is part of the preoperative work-up of cochlear implants. We investigated the applicability of clinical inner ear MR imaging at 7T and compared the visibility of inner ear structures and nerves within the internal auditory canal with images acquired at 3T.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirteen patients with sensorineural hearing loss eligible for cochlear implantation underwent examinations on 3T and 7T scanners. Two experienced head and neck radiologists evaluated the 52 inner ear datasets. Twenty-four anatomic structures of the inner ear and 1 overall score for image quality were assessed by using a 4-point grading scale for the degree of visibility.

RESULTS

The visibility of 11 of the 24 anatomic structures was rated higher on the 7T images. There was no significant difference in the visibility of 13 anatomic structures and the overall quality rating. A higher incidence of artifacts was observed in the 7T images.

CONCLUSIONS

The gain in SNR at 7T yielded a more detailed visualization of many anatomic structures, especially delicate ones, despite the challenges accompanying MR imaging at a high magnetic field.

Clinical Practice Guideline

Objective. Sudden hearing loss (SHL) is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a physician. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients who present with SHL. The guideline primarily focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) in adult patients (aged 18 and older). Prompt recognition and management of SSNHL may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life (QOL). Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 20 per 100,000 population, with about 4000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with SHL.

Purpose. The purpose of this guideline is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations in evaluating patients with SHL, with particular emphasis on managing SSNHL. The panel recognized that patients enter the health care system with SHL as a nonspecific, primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of the guideline deal with efficiently distinguishing SSNHL from other causes of SHL at the time of presentation. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, the guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients.

Results. The panel made strong recommendations that clinicians should (1) distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss in a patient presenting with SHL; (2) educate patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy; and (3) counsel patients with incomplete recovery of hearing about the possible benefits of amplification and hearing-assistive technology and other supportive measures. The panel made recommendations that clinicians should (1) assess patients with presumptive SSNHL for bilateral SHL, recurrent episodes of SHL, or focal neurologic findings; (2) diagnose presumptive ISSNHL if audiometry confirms a 30-dB hearing loss at 3 consecutive frequencies and an underlying condition cannot be identified by history and physical examination; (3) evaluate patients with ISSNHL for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging, auditory brainstem response, or audiometric follow-up; (4) offer intratympanic steroid perfusion when patients have incomplete recovery from ISSNHL after failure of initial management; and (5) obtain follow-up audiometric evaluation within 6 months of diagnosis for patients with ISSNHL. The panel offered as options that clinicians may offer (1) corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with ISSNHL and (2) hyperbaric oxygen therapy within 3 months of diagnosis of ISSNHL. The panel made a recommendation against clinicians routinely prescribing antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, vasoactive substances, or antioxidants to patients with ISSNHL. The panel made strong recommendations against clinicians (1) ordering computerized tomography of the head/brain in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive SSNHL and (2) obtaining routine laboratory tests in patients with ISSNHL.

Pediatric sensorineural hearing loss, part 1: Practical aspects for neuroradiologists

SNHL is a major cause of childhood disability worldwide, affecting 6 in 1000 children. For children with prelingual hearing loss, early diagnosis and treatment is critical to optimizing speech and language development, academic achievement, and social and emotional development. Cross-sectional imaging has come to play an important role in the evaluation of children with SNHL because otolaryngologists routinely order either CT or MR imaging to assess the anatomy of the inner ears, to identify causes of hearing loss, and to provide prognostic information related to potential treatments. In this article, which is the first in a 2-part series, we describe the basic clinical approach to imaging of children with SNHL, including the utility of CT and MR imaging of the temporal bones; we review the most recent proposed classification of inner ear malformations; and we discuss nonsyndromic congenital causes of childhood SNHL.

Characteristics of sensorineural hearing loss in children with inner ear anomalies

PURPOSE

To determine whether hearing loss in children with inner ear anomalies has some distinctive characteristics when compared to children with hearing loss but without inner ear anomalies.

METHODS

Temporal bone computed tomography scans of 69 patients with sensorineural hearing loss were examined for inner ear abnormalities of which 17 were identified. The medical histories of these patients were reviewed for the characteristics of their hearing loss, including initial presentation, natural history, and nature of loss, as well as the family history of hearing loss and risk factors for hearing loss. These were compared to age-matched controls with hearing loss but without inner ear anomalies.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients had inner ear anomalies. Records of 14 of these patients were compared to patients without inner ear anomalies. Regarding age of onset, 71.4% of patients with anomalies had onset of their hearing loss at less than 2 years old vs 78.6% without anomalies. Regarding unilateral vs bilateral, 42.9% of patients with anomalies were unilateral vs 28.6% of patients without anomalies. For patients with anomalies, 85.7% were stable and 14.3% were progressive; without anomalies, 71.4% were stable, 21.4% were progressive, and 7.1% were fluctuating. Regarding family history, only 14.3% of patients without anomalies had a positive family history vs 56% of patients with anomalies.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with inner ear anomalies and sensorineural hearing loss have an increased incidence of unilateral hearing loss and stable hearing loss as compared to controls with sensorineural hearing loss without inner ear anomalies. In addition, children with inner ear anomalies and sensorineural hearing loss are less likely to have a family history of hearing loss.

Unusual magnetic resonance findings in two children with sudden sensorineural hearing loss

OBJECTIVE: To describe the MRI findings of two pediatric patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL). CASE REPORTS: Two male patients (two-year and three-months-old, and one year and four-months-old) presented with sudden dumbness. Physical and neurological examinations were unremarkable besides bilateral hypoacusia. All the laboratory investigation was negative, and brain stem auditory evoked potentials showed deep bilateral deafness in both cases. MRI studies revealed normal inner ears and multifocal white matter areas of slight low signal on T1-weighted images and high signal on FLAIR images. The follow-up MRI studies and neurological examinations did not demonstrate alterations in the previous findings. CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients with SSHL may present cerebral white matter signal abnormalities at the MRI as the only finding. Further studies with larger casuistics need to be conducted to elucidate these findings.

A diagnostic paradigm for childhood idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine the diagnostic yield of laboratory testing, radiological imaging, and GJB2 mutation screening in a large cohort of patients with differing severities of idiopathic sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL).

DESIGN AND SETTING

We undertook a retrospective study of patients presenting with SNHL at our institution from 1993 to 2002.

RESULTS

Laboratory testing had an extremely low yield. Patients with unilateral SNHL had a significantly higher imaging yield than those with bilateral. The diagnostic yield of GJB2 screening was significantly higher in patients with severe to profound SNHL than in those with less severe SNHL. However, a relatively large number of patients with mild to moderate SNHL had positive GJB2 screens.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on diagnostic yields, we propose a cost-effective stepwise diagnostic paradigm to replace the more commonly used and costly simultaneous testing approach.

EBM RATING

C.

Auditory neural pathway evaluation on sensorineural hearing loss using diffusion tensor imaging

Diffusion tensor imaging is a new in vivo tool not only for the assessment of white matter structural integrity but also for diagnosis and assessment of disease conditions which disturb tissue structural coherence. In this study, we investigated the integrity of auditory pathway in patients of sensorineural hearing loss by means of fractional anisotropy of water diffusion to see any subtle changes of auditory pathways resulting from sensorineural hearing loss. In addition, this study suggests that the diffusion anisotropy measured by diffusion tensor imaging is highly sensitive to otherwise subtle disease processes not normally seen with conventional magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography contrast.

Evaluation of styloid process by three-dimensional computed tomography

The purpose of this paper was to investigate the length, medial angulations and other structural variants of the styloid process (SP) by three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) in patients without any complaints related to elongated SP. We performed temporal computed tomography (CT) scans in 138 cases (87 males, 51 females) with a mean age of 34.5 (17-86). The structure, length and medial angulation of SPs were evaluated on 3D reconstructed images. SP lengths varied between 1.58 and 5.48 cm (average length 2.83 cm), and the angles varied between 60.6 and 84.1 degrees (average angle 69.4 degrees). Other morphological findings were absence of SP (3 unilateral and 1 bilateral), ossification of stylohyoid ligament (9 unilateral and 27 bilateral), irregular SP (5 unilateral and 5 bilateral), fragmentation of SP (12 unilateral and 9 bilateral), absence of the proximal part (5 unilateral and 9 bilateral) and double proximal part (1 unilateral). According to our results, we propose a new classification. Absence of SP, absence of the proximal part of SP, duplication of the proximal part of SP and angle values of SP have never been reported before according to the available medical literature. 3D CT is an effective method in the evaluation of the SP length, angulations and other morphological characteristics.