S Roberts1,2, B Levin3, H Sanli4, R Ferch5, K Kong1,6, R Eisenberg1. 1. Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia. 2. Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, University of Newcastle, Australia. 3. ENT Clinics Sydney, Australia. 4. Department of ENT/Head and Neck Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia. 6. University of New South Wales Rural Clinical School, Wagga Wagga, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present our data evaluating the feasibility of simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma. METHODS: This paper describes a case series of eight adult patients with a radiologically suspected acoustic neuroma, treated at a tertiary referral centre in Newcastle, Australia, between 2012 and 2015. Patients underwent cochlear implantation concurrently with removal of an acoustic neuroma. The approach was translabyrinthine, with facial nerve monitoring and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response testing. Standard post-implant rehabilitation was employed, with three and six months' follow-up data collected. The main outcome measures were: hearing, subjective benefit of implant, operative complications and tumour recurrence. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma over a 3-year period, and had 25-63 months' follow up. There were no major complications. All patients except one gained usable hearing and were daily implant users. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma has been shown to be a safe treatment option, which will be applicable in a wide range of clinical scenarios as the indications for cochlear implantation continue to expand.
OBJECTIVE: To present our data evaluating the feasibility of simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma. METHODS: This paper describes a case series of eight adult patients with a radiologically suspected acoustic neuroma, treated at a tertiary referral centre in Newcastle, Australia, between 2012 and 2015. Patients underwent cochlear implantation concurrently with removal of an acoustic neuroma. The approach was translabyrinthine, with facial nerve monitoring and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response testing. Standard post-implant rehabilitation was employed, with three and six months' follow-up data collected. The main outcome measures were: hearing, subjective benefit of implant, operative complications and tumour recurrence. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma over a 3-year period, and had 25-63 months' follow up. There were no major complications. All patients except one gained usable hearing and were daily implant users. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous cochlear implantation with resection of acoustic neuroma has been shown to be a safe treatment option, which will be applicable in a wide range of clinical scenarios as the indications for cochlear implantation continue to expand.