Hearing Outcomes of Transmastoid Plugging for Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome by Underwater Endoscopic Surgery

2022 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshinobu Kawamura ◽  
Daisuke Yamauchi ◽  
Toshimitsu Kobayashi ◽  
Ryoukichi Ikeda ◽  
Tetsuaki Kawase ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Wilms ◽  
Arneborg Ernst ◽  
Philipp Mittmann

Background: Patients with a superior canal dehiscence syndrome display symptoms of the vestibular disorder except that of hearing loss. Therefore, any type of surgery should treat those symptoms without affecting the hearing threshold. The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent to which the hearing threshold has been affected; the evaluation process was carried out by a transmastoid plugging of the superior canal. Another aim was to estimate the risk in loss of hearing due to this surgery. Material and Methods: In a retrospective study, 31 patients with dehiscence of the superior canal, who underwent a transmastoid plugging, were included. Additionally, 8 of them with the clinical symptoms of the Menière’s disease received an endolymphatic sac surgery. A b-c threshold at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz was observed in all patients pre and postoperatively as well as in the long-term follow-up. Results: After a mean interval of 149 days, a change in the b-c threshold of 5.9 dB was detected. After 149 days, in the patient group comprising those who underwent an additional endolymphatic sac surgery, a b-c threshold change of 17.18 dB was detected. Conclusion: The transmastoid plugging of the superior semicircular canal can be performed with an acceptable risk of hearing affection. If the surgery was combined with other techniques, (e.g. endolymphatic sac surgery) then the risk increases.


2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuri Agrawal ◽  
Lloyd B. Minor ◽  
Michael C. Schubert ◽  
Kristen L. Janky ◽  
Marcela Davalos-Bichara ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 137 (0) ◽  
pp. 10-11
Author(s):  
Kiyoko Fujimori ◽  
Naoki Saka ◽  
Toru Seo ◽  
Shigeto Ota ◽  
Masafumi Sakagami

2004 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Carey ◽  
Timo P. Hirvonen ◽  
Timothy E. Hullar ◽  
Lloyd B. Minor

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (11) ◽  
pp. 825-830
Author(s):  
Jenny Öhman ◽  
Annika Forssén ◽  
Anette Sörlin ◽  
Krister Tano

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Hornibrook

Perilymph fistula (PLF) is defined as a leak of perilymph at the oval or round window. It excludes other conditions with “fistula” tests due to a dehiscent semi circular canal from cholesteatoma and the superior canal dehiscence syndrome. It was first recognized in the early days of stapedectomy as causing disequilibrium and balance problems before sealing of the stapedectomy with natural tissue became routine. It then became apparent that head trauma and barotraumatic trauma from flying or diving could be a cause of PLF. Descriptions of “spontaneous” PLF with no trauma history followed. A large literature on PLF from all causes accumulated. It became an almost emotional issue in Otolaryngology with “believers” and “nonbelievers.” The main criticisms are a lack of reliable symptoms and diagnostic tests and operative traps in reliably distinguishing a perilymph leak from local anaesthetic. There are extensive reviews on the whole topic, invariably conveying the authors' own experiences and their confirmed views on various aspects. However, a close examination reveals a disparity of definitions and assumptions on symptoms, particularly, vestibular. This is an intentionally provocative paper with suggestions on where some progress might be made.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document