Search

To determine the prevalence of endolymphatic hydrops (EH) in cochlear implant (CI) candidates with idiopathic profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) and its influence on the preservation of audiovestibular function after cochlear implantation.Prospective case series.Tertiary referral center.CI candidates with idiopathic progressive SNHL, but without classic EH-associated symptoms.Delayed intravenous gadolinium-enhanced inner ear fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging as well as pure-tone audiograms, video head impulse tests, and vestibular evoked myogenic potentials before and 4 weeks after cochlear implantation.Prevalence of EH before cochlear implantation, audiovestibular function before and after surgery in hydropic and nonhydropic ears.Thirty-two ears in 16 CI candidates were included. Nine ears (28%) with EH were detected. Although preoperative hearing thresholds, utricular function, and semicircular canal function were not different between the two groups, saccular function was reduced in hydropic ears. Ten subjects received a unilateral CI. Of these, 3 (30%) showed EH on the implanted side. There was no difference regarding postoperative hearing loss between the two groups, but the results point toward a higher vulnerability of hydropic ears with respect to loss of otolith function after cochlear implantation.This is the first study showing that EH can be assumed in about one third of CI candidates with idiopathic profound SNHL, but no classic EH-associated symptoms. Preliminary results suggest that EH has no influence on the preservation of cochlear function but could be a risk factor for loss of otolith function after cochlear implantation.To determine the prevalence of endolymphatic hydrops (EH) in cochlear implant (CI) candidates with idiopathic profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) and its influence on the preservation of audiovestibular function after cochlear implantation.Prospective case series.Tertiary referral center.CI candidates with idiopathic progressive SNHL, but without classic EH-associated symptoms.Delayed intravenous gadolinium-enhanced inner ear fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging as well as pure-tone audiograms, video head impulse tests, and vestibular evoked myogenic potentials before and 4 weeks after cochlear implantation.Prevalence of EH before cochlear implantation, audiovestibular function before and after surgery in hydropic and nonhydropic ears.Thirty-two ears in 16 CI candidates were included. Nine ears (28%) with EH were detected. Although preoperative hearing thresholds, utricular function, and semicircular canal function were not different between the two groups, saccular function was reduced in hydropic ears. Ten subjects received a unilateral CI. Of these, 3 (30%) showed EH on the implanted side. There was no difference regarding postoperative hearing loss between the two groups, but the results point toward a higher vulnerability of hydropic ears with respect to loss of otolith function after cochlear implantation.This is the first study showing that EH can be assumed in about one third of CI candidates with idiopathic profound SNHL, but no classic EH-associated symptoms. Preliminary results suggest that EH has no influence on the preservation of cochlear function but could be a risk factor for loss of otolith function after cochlear implantation.

To assess the incidence and severity of changes in hearing threshold in patients undergoing high-dose pencil-beam-scanning proton therapy (PBS-PT). This retrospective cohort study included fifty-one patients (median 50 years (range, 13-68)) treated with PBS-PT for skull base tumors. No chemotherapy was delivered. Pure tone averages (PTAs)were determined before (baseline) and after PBS-PT as the average hearing thresholds at frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz. Hearing changes were calculated as PTA differences between pre-and post-PBS-PT. A linear mixed-effects model was used to assess the relationship between the PTA at the follow-up and the baseline, the cochlea radiation dose intensity, the increased age, and the years after PBS-PT. Included patients were treated for chordoma (n = 24), chondrosarcoma (n = 9), head and neck tumors (n = 9), or meningioma (n = 3), with a mean tumor dose of 71.1 Gy (RBE) (range, 52.0-77.8), and a mean dose of 37 Gy (RBE) (range, 0.0-72.7) was delivered to the cochleas. The median time to the first follow-up was 11 months (IQR, 5.5-33.7). The PTA increased from a median of 15 dB (IQR 10.0-25) at the baseline to 23.8 (IQR 11.3-46.3) at the first follow-up. In the linear mixed-effect model, the baseline PTA (estimate 0.80, 95%CI 0.64 to 0.96, p ≤ 0.001), patient's age (0.30, 0.03 to 0.57, p = 0.029), follow-up time (2.07, 0.92 to 3.23, p ≤ 0.001), and mean cochlear dose in Gy (RBE) (0.34, 0.21 to 0.46, p ≤ 0.001) were all significantly associated with an increase in PTA at follow-up. The applied cochlear dose and baseline PTA, age, and time after treatment were significantly associated with hearing loss after proton therapy.

Background: To evaluate the long-term audiological outcomes combined with the Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (HISQUI) after Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) implantation. Methods: Prospective recall cohort study of patients who received a VSB in a tertiary academic medical center between 1996 and 2017. Air conduction (AC) and bone conduction (BC), sound field thresholds in aided and unaided conditions, and speech discrimination in noise (Oldenburger sentence test) were measured. Postoperative results were compared with preoperative audiograms. Furthermore, the HISQUI was evaluated. Results: Ten patients (eleven implants) were included, the mean follow up period was nine years. The mean AC threshold preoperatively was between 63 and 70 dB, and the BC was between 38 and 49 dB from 500 to 4000 Hz. In the free-field audiogram, the mean threshold was between 61 and 77 dB unaided vs. between 28 and 52 dB in the aided condition. The average signal to noise ratio (SNR) in the Oldenburger sentence test in the unaided condition was 10 dB ± 6.7 dB vs. 2 dB ± 5.4 dB in the aided condition. Three patients reported a good to very good hearing result, four patients a moderate, and three patients a poor hearing result. There was a significant association between the years of implantation and the HISQUI (p = 0.013), as well as a significant decrease by 14 HISQUI points per 10 dB SPL decline (SE 5.2, p = 0.023). There was a significant difference between the change of BC over the years and the HISQUI, as well as the number of years after implantation and the HISQUI. On average, per dB decrease in BC, the HISQUI decreases by 1.4 points, and every year after implantation the HISQUI decreases by 2.7 points. Conclusions: The aided threshold in free field and speech understanding in noise improved significantly with VSB. An increase over time of BC thresholds was observed as well as a decrease in HISQUI score. This decrease in BC thresholds over time may be due to presbycusis. Therefore, monitoring of these patients over time should be considered to discuss alternative hearing rehabilitation measures in a timely manner.

BACKGROUND Perfect hearing is crucial to the practice of various professions, such as instrument makers, musicians, sound engineers, and other professions not related to music, such as sonar technicians. For people of these occupational groups, we propose the term "professional ear user" (PEU) in analogy to "professional voice user". PEUs have special requirements for their hearing health, as they have well-known above-average auditory perceptual abilities on which they are professionally dependent. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize selected aspects of the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of ear disorders in PEUs. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION Prevention of hearing disorders and other ear diseases includes protection from excessive sound levels, avoidance of ototoxins and nicotine, and a safe manner of cleaning the outer auditory canal. Diagnosing hearing disorders in PEUs can be challenging, since subclinical but relevant changes in hearing cannot be reliably objectified by conventional audiometric methods. Moreover, the fact that a PEU is affected by an ear disease may influence treatment decisions. Further, physicians must be vigilant for non-organic ear diseases in PEUs. Lastly, measures to promote comprehensive ear health in PEUs as part of an educational program and to maintain ear health by means of a specialized otolaryngology service are discussed. In contrast to existing concepts, we lay the attention on the entirety of occupational groups that are specifically dependent on their ear health in a professional setting. In this context, we suggest avoiding a sole focus on hearing disorders and their prevention, but rather encourage the maintenance of a comprehensive ear health., Hintergrund Ein vollständig intaktes Hörvermögen ist zentral für die Ausübung verschiedener Berufe wie Instrumentenbaumeister, Musiker, Tonmeister sowie für weitere Berufsgruppen ohne Bezug zu Musik wie beispielsweise Sonar-Techniker. Für Personen all dieser Berufsgruppen schlagen wir in Analogie zum „Professional Voice User“ den Begriff „Professional Ear User“ (PEU) vor. PEU haben spezielle Anforderungen an ihre Ohrgesundheit, da sie über eine überdurchschnittliche auditive Wahrnehmungsfähigkeit verfügen, von der sie beruflich abhängig sind. Fragestellung Die vorliegende narrative Übersichtsarbeit hat zum Ziel, die sich daraus ergebenden speziellen Aspekte der Prävention, Diagnostik und Therapie von Ohrerkrankungen bei PEU zusammenzufassen. Ergebnisse und Schlussfolgerung Die Prävention von Hörstörungen und weiteren Ohrerkrankungen umfasst den Schutz vor zu hohen Schallpegeln, die Vermeidung von Ototoxinen oder Nikotin sowie die korrekte Durchführung einer Gehörgangsreinigung. Die Abklärung von Hörstörungen kann sich bei PEU herausfordernd gestalten, da subklinische, jedoch einschränkende Veränderungen des Hörvermögens mit konventionellen audiometrischen Methoden nicht zuverlässig objektiviert werden können. Schließlich kann das Vorliegen einer Ohrerkrankung bei einem PEU Therapieentscheidungen beeinflussen. Weiter muss bei PEU auch eine hohe Wachsamkeit bezüglich nichtorganischer Ohrerkrankungen bestehen. Abschließend werden Möglichkeiten diskutiert, um bei PEU eine umfassende Ohrgesundheit im Rahmen eines edukativen Programms zu fördern und mittels einer spezialisierten ohrenärztlichen Sprechstunde zu erhalten. Im Gegensatz zu bestehenden Konzepten ist der Fokus dabei auf die Gesamtheit der Berufsgruppen gerichtet, welche in professionellem Rahmen speziell von der Ohrgesundheit abhängig sind. Außerdem soll der Schwerpunkt hierbei nicht nur auf Hörstörungen und deren Prävention, sondern auch auf der Erhaltung einer ganzheitlichen Ohrgesundheit liegen.

BACKGROUND: Full audiological monitoring is the best strategy to detect hearing loss early and to provide timely intervention in the absence of a clinical method of otoprotection. Full monitoring requires audiological evaluation before, and then during and after ototoxic cancer treatment. In a worldwide context of monitoring protocols that vary substantially, we analyzed the audiological monitoring of childhood cancer patients over the last decade across treatment centers in Switzerland. PROCEDURE: We retrospectively searched for audiological evaluations in all nine Swiss Pediatric Oncology Centers. We analyzed proportions of patients who had audiological monitoring and described type and timing of monitoring. We determined predictors of audiological monitoring using multivariable logistic regression and described time trends. RESULTS: We included 185 patients from the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry diagnosed from 2005 to 2013 who had platinum chemotherapy and/or cranial radiation ≥30 Gray and who were alive at time of study. Less than half of children, 43%, had full audiological monitoring (before, during, and after treatment), while 72% were tested after cancer treatment. Nonstudy patients were less likely to have had monitoring in all phases of cancer treatment. Patients who received treatment with cisplatin or both platinum chemotherapy and cranial radiation were more likely to have had monitoring after treatment. Monitoring during and after treatment increased over the study period, but monitoring before treatment was insufficient in all time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Our population-based study indicates that audiological monitoring is insufficient in Switzerland, particularly for nonstudy patients. Clinicians must become more aware of the importance of full audiological monitoring.