Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 21(03): 297-301
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1585094
Systematic Review
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Methods of Hearing Preservation during Cochlear Implantation

Ahmed Khater
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt
,
Mohammad Waheed El-Anwar
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

24 March 2016

03 June 2016

Publication Date:
12 July 2016 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Recent advances in surgical techniques and electrode design have made residual hearing preservation during cochlear implantation (CI) possible, achievable, and desirable.

Objectives The objective of this study was to review the literature regarding methods used for hearing preservation during CI surgery.

Data Synthesis We performed a search in the LILACS, MEDLINE, SciELO, PubMed databases, and Cochrane Library, using the keywords CI, hearing preservation, CI electrode design, and CI soft surgery. We fully read about 15 studies that met the criteria described in “study selection”. The studies showed that several factors could contribute to possible cochlear damage during or after CI surgery and must be kept in mind; mechanical damage during electrode insertion, shock waves in the perilymph fluid due to implantation, acoustic trauma due to drilling, loss of perilymph and disruption of inner ear fluid homeostasis, potential bacterial infection, and secondary intracochlear fibrous tissue formation. The desire to preserve residual hearing has led to the development of the soft-surgery protocols with its various components; avoiding entry of blood into the cochlea and the use of hyaluronate seem to be reasonably supported, whereas the use of topical steroids is questionable. The site of entry into the cochlea, electrode design, and the depth of insertion are also important contributing factors.

Conclusion Hearing preservation would be useful for CI patients to benefit from the residual low frequency, as well as for the children who could be candidate for future regenerative hair cell therapy.

Keywords

cochlear implantation - ear - hearing
 

  • References

  • 1 Miranda PC, Sampaio AL, Lopes RA, Ramos Venosa A, de Oliveira CA. Hearing preservation in cochlear implant surgery. Int J Otolaryngol 2014; 2014: 468515
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Carlson ML, Driscoll CL, Gifford RH. , et al. Implications of minimizing trauma during conventional cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2011; 32 (06) 962-968
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Havenith S, Lammers MJ, Tange RA. , et al. Hearing preservation surgery: cochleostomy or round window approach? A systematic review. Otol Neurotol 2013; 34 (04) 667-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cohen NL. Cochlear implant soft surgery: fact or fantasy?. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997; 117 (3 Pt 1): 214-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Eshraghi AA, He J, Mou CH. , et al. D-JNKI-1 treatment prevents the progression of hearing loss in a model of cochlear implantation trauma. Otol Neurotol 2006; 27 (04) 504-511
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pau HW, Just T, Bornitz M, Lasurashvilli N, Zahnert T. Noise exposure of the inner ear during drilling a cochleostomy for cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope 2007; 117 (03) 535-540
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Franco-Vidal V, Songu M, Blanchet H, Barreau X, Darrouzet V. Intracochlear hemorrhage after gamma knife radiosurgery. Otol Neurotol 2007; 28 (02) 240-244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Radeloff A, Unkelbach MH, Tillein J. , et al. Impact of intrascalar blood on hearing. Laryngoscope 2007; 117 (01) 58-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hara M, Nomura Y, Saito K. Histopathologic study of the perilymph-suctioned labyrinth. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1990; 99 (4 Pt 1): 316-320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Adunka O, Unkelbach MH, Mack M, Hambek M, Gstoettner W, Kiefer J. Cochlear implantation via the round window membrane minimizes trauma to cochlear structures: a histologically controlled insertion study. Acta Otolaryngol 2004; 124 (07) 807-812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hassepass F, Aschendorff A, Bulla S. , et al. Radiologic Results and Hearing Preservation With a Straight Narrow Electrode via Round Window Versus Cochleostomy Approach at Initial Activation. Otol Neurotol 2015; 36 (06) 993-1000
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Richard C, Fayad JN, Doherty J, Linthicum Jr FH. Round window versus cochleostomy technique in cochlear implantation: histologic findings. Otol Neurotol 2012; 33 (07) 1181-1187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Nordfalk KF, Rasmussen K, Bunne M, Jablonski GE. Deep round window insertion versus standard approach in cochlear implant surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 273 (01) 43-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Garcia-Ibanez LM, Acias AR, Morera C. , et al. An evaluation of the preservation of residual hearing with the Nucleus(R) Contour Advance trade mark electrode. Acta Otolaryngol 2008; 129 (06) 1-14
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Briggs RJ, Tykocinski M, Stidham K, Roberson JB. Cochleostomy site: implications for electrode placement and hearing preservation. Acta Otolaryngol 2005; 125 (08) 870-876
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Skarzynski H, Lorens A, Piotrowska A, Anderson I. Preservation of low frequency hearing in partial deafness cochlear implantation (PDCI) using the round window surgical approach. Acta Otolaryngol 2007; 127 (01) 41-48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Skarzyński H, Lorens A, D'Haese P. , et al. Preservation of residual hearing in children and post-lingually deafened adults after cochlear implantation: an initial study. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2002; 64 (04) 247-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lenarz T, Stöver T, Buechner A. , et al. Temporal bone results and hearing preservation with a new straight electrode. Audiol Neurootol 2006; 11 (01) (Suppl. 01) 34-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Briggs RJ, Tykocinski M, Xu J. , et al. Comparison of round window and cochleostomy approaches with a prototype hearing preservation electrode. Audiol Neurootol 2006; 11 (Suppl. 01) 42-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kontorinis G, Lenarz T, Stöver T, Paasche G. Impact of the insertion speed of cochlear implant electrodes on the insertion forces. Otol Neurotol 2011; 32 (04) 565-570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Anagiotos A, Beutner D, Gostian AO, Schwarz D, Luers JC, Hüttenbrink KB. Insertion of Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Using the Underwater Technique for Preserving Residual Hearing. Otol Neurotol 2016; 37 (04) 339-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Laszig R, Ridder GJ, Fradis M. Intracochlear insertion of electrodes using hyaluronic acid in cochlear implant surgery. J Laryngol Otol 2002; 116 (05) 371-372
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Seyyedi M, Nadol Jr JB. Intracochlear inflammatory response to cochlear implant electrodes in humans. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35 (09) 1545-1551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Choi CH, Oghalai JS. Predicting the effect of post-implant cochlear fibrosis on residual hearing. Hear Res 2005; 205 (1–2): 193-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Friedland DR, Runge-Samuelson C. Soft cochlear implantation: rationale for the surgical approach. Trends Amplif 2009; 13 (02) 124-138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Hargunani CA, Kempton JB, DeGagne JM, Trune DR. Intratympanic injection of dexamethasone: time course of inner ear distribution and conversion to its active form. Otol Neurotol 2006; 27 (04) 564-569
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Van Abel KM, Dunn CC, Sladen DP. , et al. Hearing preservation among patients undergoing cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2015; 36 (03) 416-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mick P, Amoodi H, Shipp D. , et al. Hearing preservation with full insertion of the FLEXsoft electrode. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35 (01) e40-e44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wanna GB, Noble JH, Carlson ML. , et al. Impact of electrode design and surgical approach on scalar location and cochlear implant outcomes. Laryngoscope 2014; 124 (06) (Suppl. 06) S1-S7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Skarzynski H. , et al. Cochlear implantation with hearing preservation yields significant benefit for speech recognition in complex listening environments. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (04) 413-425
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Gantz BJ, Turner C, Gfeller KE, Lowder MW. Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing. Laryngoscope 2005; 115 (05) 796-802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Roland PS, Wright CG. Surgical aspects of cochlear implantation: mechanisms of insertional trauma. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2006; 64: 11-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar