Search

Introduction Schwannomas of the eighth cranial nerve are benign tumors that usually occur in the internal auditory canal or the cerebellopontine angle cistern. Rarely, these tumors may originate from the neural elements within the vestibule, cochlea, or semicircular canals and are called intralabyrinthine schwannomas. Intracochlear schwannomas (ICSs) represent a small percentage of these tumors, and their diagnosis is based on high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Objectives To report the clinical and radiologic features and audiometric testing results of an ICS in a 48-year-old man after a 22-month follow-up period. Resumed Report A patient with an 8-year history of persistent tinnitus in his right ear, combined with ipsilateral progressive hearing loss and aural fullness. Audiometry revealed normal hearing in the left ear and a moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear, with decreased speech reception threshold and word recognition score, compared with the exam performed 5 years previously. MRI showed a small intracochlear nodular lesion in the modiolus, isointense on T1 with a high contrast enhancement on T1 postgadolinium images. During the follow-up period, there were no radiologic changes on imaging studies. Thus, a wait-and-scan policy was chosen as the lesion remained stable with no considerable growth and the patient still presents with residual hearing. Conclusions Once diagnosed, not all ICS patients require surgery. Treatment options for ICS include stereotactic radiotherapy and rescanning policy, depending on the tumor's size, evidence of the tumor's growth, degree of hearing loss, intractable vestibular symptoms, concern about the pathologic diagnosis, and the patient's other medical conditions.

Introduction:  The bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) is a bone conduction hearing device that transmits sound directly into the inner ear. It is mainly used in patients with conductive hearing loss associated with aural atresia, but it is also used in those with mixed and sensorineural hearing loss., Goals:  To review the main indications for BAHA, to analyze the audiometric results and its benefits for patients and compare them with other treatment modalities, and to compare the literature data with our sample of 13 patients., Method:  The research was performed using a database covering works in English, Spanish, and Portuguese, with no limitations in the years when the procedures were performed. We compared the literature data with our results for the 13 patients who underwent BAHA implantation between the years 2000 and 2009., Results:  Most of the studies showed that BAHA has great advantages over reconstructive surgery in terms of hearing results, complications, and disease recurrence. The postoperative results for our 13 patients were satisfactory and comparable with the results from the literature, with closure of the air-bone gap in 7 patients and achieving an air-bone gap of 10 dB in 6 patients. No postoperative complications were observed., Conclusion:  BAHA is a better treatment option than reconstructive surgery for patients with bilateral deafness. It is a relatively simple surgical procedure with few complications and good hearing results. Recent studies have examined its use in conductive and unilateral sensorineural hearing loss.

Unlabelled: The technological advances in cochlear implants and processing strategies have enabled subjects affected by severe to profound hearing loss to hear sounds and recognize speech in various different degrees. The variability of hearing outcomes in subjects with post-lingual deafness has been significant and cochlear implant indications have been extended to include an ever larger population., Objective: This paper aims to look into the groups of post-lingual deafness patients to find where cochlear implants have yielded better outcomes than conventional hearing aids., Materials and Methods: Review the literature available on databases SciELO, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and LILACS-BIREME. The publications selected for review were rated as A or B on evidence strength on the day of the review. Their authors analyzed and compared hearing aids and cochlear implants in populations of post-lingually deaf patients., Study Design: Systematic review., Results: Eleven out of the 2,169 papers searched were found to be pertinent to the topic and were rated B for evidence strength. Six studies were prospective cohort trials, four were cross-sectional studies and one was a clinical trial., Conclusion: The assessment done on the benefits yielded by post-lingually deaf subjects from cochlear implants showed that they are effective and provide for better results than conventional hearing aids.