Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2024; 85(02): 123-130
DOI: 10.1055/a-2021-8762
Original Article

Reported Hearing Outcome Measures Following Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Vestibular Schwannoma: A Scoping Review

Ibrahim Almufarrij 
1   Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
2   Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
,
Cathal John Hannan 
3   Department of Neurosurgery, Manchester Centre for Clinical Neurosciences, Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
4   Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
5   Geoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Andrew Thomas King 
3   Department of Neurosurgery, Manchester Centre for Clinical Neurosciences, Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
4   Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
5   Geoffrey Jefferson Brain Research Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Andy Vail 
6   Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Calvin Heal 
6   Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Gillian Whitfield 
7   The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
8   Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Omar Nathan Pathmanaban 
3   Department of Neurosurgery, Manchester Centre for Clinical Neurosciences, Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
4   Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
9   Division of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Simon K. Lloyd 
9   Division of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
10   Department of Otolaryngology, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
11   Department of Otolaryngology, Northern Care Alliance, Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
,
Kevin J. Munro 
1   Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
12   Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations Funding This research was facilitated by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre and the Greater Manchester Comprehensive Local Research Network.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Evidence on hearing outcome measures when assessing hearing preservation following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for adults with vestibular schwannoma (VS) has not previously been collated in a structured review.

Objective The objective of the present study was to perform a scoping review of the evidence regarding the choice of hearing outcomes and other methodological characteristics following SRS for adults with VS.

Methods The protocol was registered in the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (INPLASY) and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension guidelines for scoping reviews. A systematic search of five online databases revealed 1,591 studies, 247 of which met the inclusion criteria.

Results The majority of studies (n = 213, 86%) were retrospective cohort or case series with the remainder (n = 34, 14%) prospective cohort. Pure-tone audiometry and speech intelligibility were included in 222 (90%) and 158 (64%) studies, respectively, often summarized within a classification scheme and lacking procedural details. Fifty-nine (24%) studies included self-report measures. The median duration of follow-up, when reported, was 43 months (interquartile range: 29, 4–150).

Conclusion Evidence on hearing disability after SRS for VS is based on low-quality studies which are inherently susceptible to bias. This review has highlighted an urgent need for a randomized controlled trial assessing hearing outcomes in patients with VS managed with radiosurgery or radiological observation. Similarly, consensus and coproduction of a core outcome set to determine relevant hearing and communication outcome domains is required. This will ensure that patient priorities, including communication abilities in the presence of background noise and reduced participation restrictions, are addressed.

Keywords

stereotactic radiosurgery - vestibular schwannoma - scoping review - hearing preservation


Publication History

Received: 15 September 2022

Accepted: 21 January 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
29 January 2023

Article published online:
22 February 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Marinelli JP, Beeler CJ, Carlson ML, Caye-Thomasen P, Spear SA, Erbele ID. Global incidence of sporadic vestibular schwannoma: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2022; 167 (02) 209-214
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Smith MJ, Bowers NL, Bulman M. et al. Revisiting neurofibromatosis type 2 diagnostic criteria to exclude LZTR1-related schwannomatosis. Neurology 2017; 88 (01) 87-92
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Matthies C, Samii M. Management of 1000 vestibular schwannomas (acoustic neuromas): clinical presentation. Neurosurgery 1997; 40 (01) 1-9 , discussion 9–10
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Kirchmann M, Karnov K, Hansen S, Dethloff T, Stangerup SE, Caye-Thomasen P. Ten-year follow-up on tumor growth and hearing in patients observed with an intracanalicular vestibular schwannoma. Neurosurgery 2017; 80 (01) 49-56
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Carlson ML, Vivas EX, McCracken DJ. et al. Congress of neurological surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines on hearing preservation outcomes in patients with sporadic vestibular schwannomas. Neurosurgery 2018; 82 (02) E35-E39
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Johnson S, Kano H, Faramand A. et al. Long term results of primary radiosurgery for vestibular schwannomas. J Neurooncol 2019; 145 (02) 247-255
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Golfinos JG, Hill TC, Rokosh R. et al. A matched cohort comparison of clinical outcomes following microsurgical resection or stereotactic radiosurgery for patients with small- and medium-sized vestibular schwannomas. J Neurosurg 2016; 125 (06) 1472-1482
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Kondziolka D, Wolf A. Commentary: ten-year follow-up on tumor growth and hearing in patients observed with an intracanalicular vestibular schwannoma. Neurosurgery 2017; 80 (01) 57-59
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Akpinar B, Mousavi SH, McDowell MM. et al. Early radiosurgery improves hearing preservation in vestibular schwannoma patients with normal hearing at the time of diagnosis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 95 (02) 729-734
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Ogino A, Long H, Johnson S. et al. Useful hearing preservation is improved in vestibular schwannoma patients who undergo stereotactic radiosurgery before further hearing deterioration ensues. J Neurooncol 2021; 152 (03) 559-566
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Régis J, Carron R, Park MC. et al. Wait-and-see strategy compared with proactive Gamma Knife surgery in patients with intracanalicular vestibular schwannomas. J Neurosurg 2010; 113 (Suppl): 105-111
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Kondziolka D, Mousavi SH, Kano H, Flickinger JC, Lunsford LD. The newly diagnosed vestibular schwannoma: radiosurgery, resection, or observation?. Neurosurg Focus 2012; 33 (03) E8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Breivik CN, Nilsen RM, Myrseth E. et al. Conservative management or Gamma Knife radiosurgery for vestibular schwannoma: tumor growth, symptoms, and quality of life. Neurosurgery 2013; 73 (01) 48-56 , discussion 56–57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Hunter JB, Dowling EM, Lohse CM. et al. Hearing outcomes in conservatively managed vestibular schwannoma patients with serviceable hearing. Otol Neurotol 2018; 39 (08) e704 –e711
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Ismail O, Sobhy O, Assal S, Sanghera P, Begg P, Irving R. Comparing hearing outcomes in irradiated and conservatively managed vestibular schwannoma. Otol Neurotol 2022; 43 (03) e374-e381
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Schnurman Z, Gurewitz J, Smouha E. et al. Matched comparison of hearing outcomes in patients with vestibular schwannoma treated with stereotactic radiosurgery or observation. Neurosurgery 2022; 91 (04) 641-647
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Peris-Celda M, Graffeo CS, Perry A. et al. Beyond the ABCs: hearing loss and quality of life in vestibular schwannoma. Mayo Clin Proc 2020; 95 (11) 2420-2428
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak VIII: consumer satisfaction with hearing aids is slowly increasing. Hear J 2010; 63 (01) 19-20 , 22, 24, 26, 28, 30–32
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Moore DR, Edmondson-Jones M, Dawes P. et al. Relation between speech-in-noise threshold, hearing loss and cognition from 40-69 years of age. PLoS One 2014; 9 (09) e107720
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Dawes P, Fortnum H, Moore DR. et al. Hearing in middle age: a population snapshot of 40- to 69-year olds in the United Kingdom. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (03) e44-e51
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Pierzycki RH, Edmondson-Jones M, Dawes P, Munro KJ, Moore DR, Kitterick PT. Associations between hearing health and well-being in unilateral hearing impairment. Ear Hear 2021; 42 (03) 520-530
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Gardner G, Robertson JH. Hearing preservation in unilateral acoustic neuroma surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1988; 97 (01) 55-66
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of hearing preservation in acoustic neuroma (vestibular schwannoma). American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, INC. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995; 113 (03) 179-180
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Coughlin AR, Willman TJ, Gubbels SP. Systematic review of hearing preservation after radiotherapy for vestibular schwannoma. Otol Neurotol 2018; 39 (03) 273-283
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Guadix SW, Tao AJ, An A. et al. Assessing the long-term safety and efficacy of Gamma Knife and linear accelerator radiosurgery for vestibular schwannoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurooncol Pract 2021; 8 (06) 639-651
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Savardekar AR, Terrell D, Lele SJ. et al. Primary treatment of small to medium (<3 cm) sporadic vestibular schwannomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis on hearing preservation and tumor control rates for microsurgery versus radiosurgery. World Neurosurg 2022; 160: 102-113.e12
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W. et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 2018; 169 (07) 467-473
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Akers JUoYCfR. Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. New York: CRD, University of York; 2009
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018; 18 (01) 143
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Newman CW, Jacobson GP, Spitzer JB. Development of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996; 122 (02) 143-148
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC. et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016; 355: i4919
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Dhayalan D, Tveiten ØV, Goplen FK. et al. Comparing the impact of upfront radiosurgery versus expectation in vestibular schwannoma (the V-REX study): protocol for a randomised, observer-blinded, 4-year, parallel-group, single-centre, superiority study. BMJ Open 2021; 11 (03) e039396
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Killion MC, Niquette PA. What can the pure-tone audiogram tell us about a patient's SNR loss?. Hear J 2000; 53: 46-48 , 50, 52–53
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Glasberg BR, Moore BC. Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear hearing impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. Scand Audiol Suppl 1989; 32: 1-25
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Amlani AM, Punch JL, Ching TY. Methods and applications of the audibility index in hearing aid selection and fitting. Trends Amplif 2002; 6 (03) 81-129
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Almufarrij I, Dillon H, Dawes P. et al. Web- and app-based tools for remote hearing assessment: a scoping review. Int J Audiol 2022; •••: 1-14
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 De Sousa KC, Swanepoel W, Moore DR, Myburgh HC, Smits C. Improving sensitivity of the digits-in-noise test using antiphasic stimuli. Ear Hear 2020; 41 (02) 442-450
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Alhanbali S, Dawes P, Lloyd S, Munro KJ. Self-reported listening-related effort and fatigue in hearing-impaired adults. Ear Hear 2017; 38 (01) e39-e48
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Allen D, Hickson L, Ferguson M. Defining a patient-centred core outcome domain set for the assessment of hearing rehabilitation with clients and professionals. Front Neurosci 2022; 16: 787607
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10 (04) 407-415
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Schünemann HJ, Puhan M, Goldstein R, Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH. Measurement properties and interpretability of the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ). COPD 2005; 2 (01) 81-89
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Carlson ML, Tveiten ØV, Yost KJ, Lohse CM, Lund-Johansen M, Link MJ. The minimal clinically important difference in vestibular schwannoma quality-of-life assessment: an important step beyond P <.05. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015; 153 (02) 202-208
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Gurgel RK, Jackler RK, Dobie RA, Popelka GR. A new standardized format for reporting hearing outcome in clinical trials. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 147 (05) 803-807
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Ottaviani F, Neglia CB, Ventrella L, Giugni E, Motti E. Hearing loss and changes in transient evoked otoacoustic emissions after Gamma Knife radiosurgery for acoustic neurinomas. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002; 128 (11) 1308-1312
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Park MJ, Park HJ, Chung JW. et al. Factors affecting hearing deterioration in vestibular schwannoma patients treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery: the Asan Medical Center experience. Acta Otolaryngol 2018; 138 (02) 96-104
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Raaijmakers E, Engelen AM. Is sensorineural hearing loss a possible side effect of nasopharyngeal and parotid irradiation? A systematic review of the literature. Radiother Oncol 2002; 65 (01) 1-7
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Caye-Thomasen P, Dethloff T, Hansen S, Stangerup SE, Thomsen J. Hearing in patients with intracanalicular vestibular schwannomas. Audiol Neurotol 2007; 12 (01) 1-12
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Hasegawa T, Kato T, Yamamoto T. et al. Long-term hearing outcomes after Gamma Knife surgery in patients with vestibular schwannoma with hearing preservation: evaluation in 92 patients with serial audiograms. J Neurooncol 2018; 138 (02) 283-290
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Hasegawa T, Kida Y, Kato T, Iizuka H, Yamamoto T. Factors associated with hearing preservation after Gamma Knife surgery for vestibular schwannomas in patients who retain serviceable hearing. J Neurosurg 2011; 115 (06) 1078-1086
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Smith DK, Warren DL, Vlahov D. et al. Design and baseline participant characteristics of the human immunodeficiency virus epidemiology research (HER) study: a prospective cohort study of human immunodeficiency virus infection in US women. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 146 (06) 459-469
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Little RJ, D'Agostino R, Cohen ML. et al. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2012; 367 (14) 1355-1360
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Mahboubi H, Sahyouni R, Moshtaghi O. et al. CyberKnife for treatment of vestibular schwannoma: a meta-analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017; 157 (01) 7-15
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar