Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence Syndrome

Author(s):  
Ja-Won Koo
2015 ◽  
Vol 76 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrance Chung ◽  
Nolan Ung ◽  
Daniel Nagasawa ◽  
Panayiotis Pelargos ◽  
Kimberly Thill ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Alok A. Bhatt ◽  
Larry B. Lundy ◽  
Erik H. Middlebrooks ◽  
Prasanna Vibhute ◽  
Vivek Gupta ◽  
...  

ORL ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Carlo Modugno ◽  
Cristina Brandolini ◽  
Gabriella Savastio ◽  
Alberto Rinaldi Ceroni ◽  
Antonio Pirodda

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 756-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen F. Watters ◽  
John J. Rosowski ◽  
Todd Sauter ◽  
Daniel J. Lee

2020 ◽  
Vol 133 (2) ◽  
pp. 462-466
Author(s):  
Vivian Wung ◽  
Prasanth Romiyo ◽  
Edwin Ng ◽  
Courtney Duong ◽  
Thien Nguyen ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEThe authors compared postoperative symptoms between patients with sealed and those with plugged semicircular canal dehiscence repairs.METHODSIn total, 136 ears from 118 patients who underwent surgical repair for semicircular canal dehiscence were identified via chart review. Data from postoperative MRI scans showing preservation or loss of semicircular canal fluid signal and postoperative reports of autophony, amplification, aural fullness, tinnitus, hyperacusis, hearing loss, vertigo, dizziness, disequilibrium, oscillopsia, and headache were amalgamated and analyzed.RESULTSPatients with preservation of fluid signal were far less likely to have dizziness postoperatively (p = 0.007, OR 0.158, 95% CI 0.041–0.611). In addition, these patients were more likely to have tinnitus postoperatively (p = 0.028, OR 3.515, 95% CI 1.145–10.787).CONCLUSIONSThe authors found that superior semicircular canal dehiscence patients who undergo sealing without plugging have improved balance outcomes but show more tinnitus postoperatively than patients who undergo plugging.


2021 ◽  
pp. 000348942110412
Author(s):  
Douglas J. Totten ◽  
Miriam R. Smetak ◽  
Nauman F. Manzoor ◽  
Elizabeth L. Perkins ◽  
Nathan D. Cass ◽  
...  

Objective: To compare outcomes of endoscope-assisted middle cranial fossa MCF) repair of superior semicircular canal dehiscence (SSCD) compared to microscopic MCF repair. Study design: Retrospective cohort. Setting: Tertiary medical center neurotology practice. Methods: Retrospective chart review and cohort study of patients who underwent surgical repair of SSCD via MCF approach from 2010 to 2019 at our institution. Patients were categorized according to use of endoscope intraoperatively. Pre- and post-operative symptom number was calculated from 8 patient-reported symptoms. Pre- and post-operative changes in symptom number were assessed using paired t-tests. Single-predictor binary logistic regression was used to compare final reported symptoms between cohorts. Linear regression was performed to assess air-bone gap (ABG) changes postoperatively between cohorts. Results: Forty-six patients received surgical management for SSCD. Of these, 27 (59%) were male and 19 (41%) were female. Bilateral SSCD was present in 14 cases (29%), of which 3 underwent surgical management bilaterally, for a total of 49 surgical ears. Surgery was performed on the right ear in 19 cases (39%) and on the left in 30 cases (61%). Forty ears (82%) underwent microscopic repair while 9 (18%) underwent endoscope-assisted repair. Microscopic and endoscope-assisted MCF repair both demonstrated significantly improved symptom number postoperatively ( P < .001 for each). There was no significant difference in change in ABG between the 2 cohorts. On average, patient-reported symptoms and audiometrically-tested hearing improved postoperatively in both groups. Conclusion: While endoscopic-assisted MCF repair has the potential to provide better visualization of medial and downslope defects, repair via this technique yields similar results and is equivalent to MCF repair utilizing the microscope alone.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document