Search

Objectives: To evaluate and compare the long-term results of patients who underwent facial nerve decompression surgery with either transmastoid-supralabyrinthine (TMSL) or combined transmastoid- middle cranial fossa (MCF) approach for traumatic facial nerve paralysis., Materials and Methods: This is a single-center retrospective case-control study. The medical records of traumatic facial paralysis patients with House Brackmann (HB) Grade 6 who underwent facial nerve decompression surgery at via either TMSL or MCF approach between January 2011 and December 2017 were reviewed. The patients who had otic capsule involvement and total sensorineural hearing loss, therefore underwent translabyrinthine facial nerve decompression, and the patients follow-up period has not yet reached four years were excluded from the study. Postoperative HB score and hearing status were compared., Results: Eleven patients were operated with MCF approach (group 1), while 9 patients with TMSL approach (group 2). Average age of patients was 20.04 + 15.2 (range:4-47) years. Three (15 %) patients were female, while 17 (85 %) was male. Geniculate ganglion (90 %) was the most affected segment of the facial nerve. Facial nerve edema was observed in all cases, while intraneural hematoma were encountered in 4 (20 %) cases. Statistically significant improvement in median HB scores were reached in both groups, and no significant difference was observed in post-operative HB scores between both techniques. No significant difference in median AC 0,5-4 khZ and BC 0,5-3 kHz thresholds was observed between both techniques., Conclusion: Even middle fossa approach is the best surgical technique to explore geniculate ganglion and labyrinthine segment of facial nerve, the functional results of transmastoid supralabrynthine approach, which is not needed craniotomy with low complication rate are as successful as middle fossa approach in selected patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest There is no conflict of interest among the author. There is no financial supporter of this study., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study aims to observe the effects of social and demographic factors on the language development of prelingual pediatric cochlear implant patients., Patients and Methods: Between April 2006 and April 2010, 44 children (26 boys, 18 girls; mean age 81.1±16.9 months; range 54 to 115 months) who were prelingually implanted and who had an implant experience of at least 36 months were retrospectively analyzed. Only the patients without mental-motor retardation, cochlear anomaly and revision surgery and who continued their education without any interruption were selected. Receptive and expressive vocabulary tests were performed on these patients. Social and demographic features including gender, implant age, parents' education status and annual income were recorded. The relationship between language development and socio-demographic factors were investigated., Results: Patients implanted before the age of 36 months showed better levels of receptive and expressive language. Children with higher maternal education levels showed significantly better expressive and receptive equivalent language ages. Annual income of the families had significant positive impacts on the language development of the children who were implanted before the age of 36 months., Conclusion: Both expressive and receptive language skills over 36 months of implant experience are significantly associated with age at the time of the implant and socio-economic status of the parents.

The aim of the present study was to describe the use of the endoscopic-assisted cochlear implantation in cases with an unsuccessful standard surgical technique because of not achieving adequate exposure to the round window (RW). Three patients with a bilateral profound hearing loss were operated using an endoscopic-assisted cochlear implant procedure at our tertiary university referral center between 2012 and 2014. In all of the patients, a retroauricular "c" shaped incision was performed and a subperiosteal pocket was created. Standard cortical mastoidectomy and posterior tympanotomy were accomplished using a otomicroscope. However, RW and promontory could not be seen using this approach. The tympanomeatal flap was elevated and the middle ear cavity was entered A rigid 0 degree endoscope (2.7 mm wide, 18 cm in length) (Karl Storz company, Tuttlingen, Germany) and a connected HD camera system (Karl Storz Company, Tuttlingen, Germany) were used to expose RW through posterior tympanotomy, and a drill was passed through the external ear canal. The RW niche was removed using a diamond burr under endoscopic view; the endoscope was placed through the external ear canal, and electrodes were transferred through posterior tympanotomy. The electrodes were fully inserted under the endoscopic view in all cases. Endoscopic-assisted cochlear implantation may be a safe alternative surgical technique in cases where surgeons are not able to visualize RW and promontory using a microscope. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To compare two different percutaneous bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) abutment systems regarding operation time, scar healing, quality of life, implant stability, audiologic results, and complications. MATERIALS and METHODS: The study involves a prospective multi-center clinical evaluation. Thirty-two consecutive patients who had undergone BAHA surgery from January 2011 to January 2013 in two tertiary centers were included in the study. The Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was used to assess the patients at least 6 months after surgery. The operation time and complications were recorded. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were recorded using resonance frequency analysis. Holger's classification was used to evaluate skin reactions. RESULTS: The mean length of the operation was 39.2±4 min for standard abutment and 18.3±5.7 min for hydroxyapatite-coated abutment. ISQ scores were significantly better for standard abutment in all tests. The mean total Glasgow Inventory Benefit Score was 39.3±19 for the standard abutment and 46.3±24.5 for the hydroxyapatite-coated abutment groups, but there was no statistical significance between the two groups. There was no difference in audiological improvement between the two groups after surgery. CONCLUSION: Hydroxyapatite-coated abutment provided a shorter operation time that was significantly different from standard abutment. There were no significant differences between standard abutment and hydroxyapatite-coated abutment regarding audiologic improvement, quality of life, loading time, and complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]