1
|
Aljazeeri I, Alturaiki S, Abdelsamad Y, Alzhrani F, Hagr A. Various approaches to the round window for cochlear implantation: a systematic review. J Laryngol Otol 2023; 137:1064-1082. [PMID: 35729690 DOI: 10.1017/s0022215122001438] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Round window approaches are used to insert a cochlear implant electrode array into the scala tympani. This study aimed to review the literature to find the reported round window approaches. METHOD This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses ('PRISMA') guidelines. Articles that described their surgical approach to the round window were included. The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched through to June 2021. The study protocol was registered on Prospero (reference number: CRD42021226940). RESULTS A total of 42 reports were included. The following approaches were documented: the standard facial recess, keyhole, retrofacial, modified suprameatal, transaditus, combined posterior tympanotomy and endomeatal, modified Veria, canal wall down approaches, and endoscopically assisted technique. CONCLUSION This review suggested that there are numerous distinct round window approaches, providing alternatives when the round window is inaccessible through the standard facial recess.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Aljazeeri
- Aljaber Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology Specialized Hospital, Ministry of Health, Ahsa, Saudi Arabia
- King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center, College of Medicine, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - S Alturaiki
- Aljaber Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology Specialized Hospital, Ministry of Health, Ahsa, Saudi Arabia
| | - Y Abdelsamad
- Research Department, MED-EL GmbH, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - F Alzhrani
- King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center, College of Medicine, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - A Hagr
- King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center, College of Medicine, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jia H, Pan J, Gu W, Tan H, Chen Y, Zhang Z, Jiang M, Li Y, Sterkers O, Wu H. Robot-Assisted Electrode Array Insertion Becomes Available in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients: First Report and an Intra-Individual Study. Front Surg 2021; 8:695728. [PMID: 34307444 PMCID: PMC8294934 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.695728] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2021] [Accepted: 06/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: As an advanced surgical technique to reduce trauma to the inner ear, robot-assisted electrode array (EA) insertion has been applied in adult cochlear implantation (CI) and was approved as a safe surgical procedure that could result in better outcomes. As the mastoid and temporal bones are generally smaller in children, which would increase the difficulty for robot-assisted manipulation, the clinical application of these systems for CI in children has not been reported. Given that the pediatric candidate is the main population, we aim to investigate the safety and reliability of robot-assisted techniques in pediatric cochlear implantation. Methods: Retrospective cohort study at a referral center in Shanghai including all patients of simultaneous bilateral CI with robotic assistance on one side (RobOtol® system, Collin ORL, Bagneux, France), and manual insertion on the other (same brand of EA and CI in both side), from December 2019 to June 2020. The surgical outcomes, radiological measurements (EA positioning, EA insertion depth, mastoidectomy size), and audiological outcomes (Behavior pure-tone audiometry) were evaluated. Results: Five infants (17.8 ± 13.5 months, ranging from 10 to 42 months) and an adult (39 years old) were enrolled in this study. Both perimodiolar and lateral wall EAs were included. The robot-assisted EA insertion was successfully performed in all cases, although the surgical zone in infants was about half the size in adults, and no difference was observed in mastoidectomy size between robot-assisted and manual insertion sides (p = 0.219). The insertion depths of EA with two techniques were similar (P = 0.583). The robot-assisted technique showed no scalar deviation, but scalar deviation occurred for one manually inserted pre-curved EA (16%). Early auditory performance was similar to both techniques. Conclusion: Robot-assisted technique for EA insertion is approved to be used safely and reliably in children, which is possible and potential for better scalar positioning and might improve long-term auditory outcome. Standard mastoidectomy size was enough for robot-assisted technique. This first study marks the arrival of the era of robotic CI for all ages.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Huan Jia
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Jinxi Pan
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Wenxi Gu
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Haoyue Tan
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Ying Chen
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Zhihua Zhang
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Mengda Jiang
- Department of Radiology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Yun Li
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| | - Olivier Sterkers
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,APHP, Groupe hospitalo-Universitaire Pitié Salpêtrière, Otorhinolaryngology Department, Unit of Otology, Auditory Implants and Skull Base Surgery, Paris, France
| | - Hao Wu
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Ear Institute, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.,Shanghai Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine on Ear and Nose Diseases, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
A New CT Parameter for Predicting Residual Hearing Preservation in Cochlear Implantation: The "Basal Turn-Facial Ridge Angle". Otol Neurotol 2021; 42:e161-e167. [PMID: 33278244 DOI: 10.1097/mao.0000000000002918] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We suggest a simple measurement, called the "basal turn-facial ridge (BT-FR) angle," for determining the electrode insertion axis using preoperative temporal bone computed tomography (CT) to predict hearing preservation (HP) in cochlear implantation (CI). STUDY DESIGN Retrospective chart review. SETTING Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS Eighty-two ears that underwent CI between 2010 and 2018 were included. Ears with preoperative thresholds less than or equal to 80 dB HL at 125, 250, and 500 Hz were enrolled and grouped using the criteria of Skarżyński et al.: Group 1, complete or partial HP; Group 2, minimal HP or complete hearing loss. INTERVENTION All subjects underwent CI with soft surgery techniques through the round window approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The BT-FR angle is the angle between the basal turn line (BT-line), which is a straight line passing through the center of the longitudinal axis of the BT, and the facial ridge line, which is a straight line running from the endpoint of the BT-line to a point just above the facial ridge. RESULTS The BT-FR angle was 2.5 ± 2.9 degrees in Group 1 and -0.3 ± 2.7 degrees in Group 2 (p = 0.003). The angle and hearing loss showed a significant negative correlation (r = -0.401, p = 0.002). In multiple linear regression, "age at operation" (β coefficient 0.260; p = 0.001) and the "BT-FR angle" (-1.967; p = 0.001) were significant variables affecting the degree of residual hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS The BT-FR angle, which can be measured simply, may be useful to predict residual HP after CI.
Collapse
|
4
|
Radiological and surgical aspects of round window visibility during cochlear implantation: a retrospective analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; 279:67-74. [PMID: 33471167 PMCID: PMC8739281 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-06611-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2020] [Accepted: 01/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Purpose The round window approach has become the most preferred option for cochlear implant (CI) insertion, however, sometimes it may not be possible due to the (in)visibility of the round window membrane (RWM). We addressed the prevalence, consequences and indicators of difficult detection of the RWM in cochlear implant surgery. Methods This study retrospectively analysed the operative reports and preoperative high resolution axial-computed tomography (CT) scans of a consecutive cohort of patients who underwent a CI insertion. The main outcomes were surgical outcomes of the RW approach, and assessment of radiological
markers. Results The operative reports showed that RWM insertion was feasible in 151 out of 153 patients. In 18% of the patients the RWM was difficult to visualize. All these patients had at least one intraoperative event. The chorda tympani nerve (CTN) or posterior canal wall was affected in 8% of the 153 patients and the fallopian canal in 6%. These patients had a facial-chorda tympani nerve distance on the CT scan that was considerably smaller than normal patients (1.5 mm vs 2.3 mm). In addition, a prediction line towards the anterolateral side of the RWM was found to be more prevalent in these patients’ CT scans (sensitivity 81%, specificity 63%). Conclusion The RW approach is feasible in almost all patients undergoing CI surgery. Difficult visualisation of the RWM seems to lead to at least one intraoperative event. Radiological measures showed that these patients had a smaller facial recess and a more anteriorly placed facial nerve, which can be used to better plan a safe insertion approach.
Collapse
|