Advertisement

Hearing Preservation

  • Luciano MastronardiEmail author
  • Alberto Campione
  • Ali Zomorodi
  • Ettore Di Scipio
  • Antonio Adornetti
  • Takanori Fukushima
Chapter

Abstract

Hearing preservation in vestibular schwannoma surgery is most influenced by the selection of eligible patients: middle fossa or retrosigmoid approaches may be attempted in patients with small tumor size (<1.5–2 cm) and good preoperative hearing. As regards the sole hearing outcome, the apparent advantages of less invasive options (wait and watch, radiotherapy) may be in reality problematic in the long term: the amount of sequelae is not inferior to those produced by primary hearing preservation surgery, and for this reason surgery should be attempted in every case of preoperative serviceable hearing. Intraoperative cochlear nerve monitoring should be used when hearing preservation is attempted; in respect of the preferable technique, there is still insufficient evidence to conclude whether direct monitoring of the eighth cranial nerve is superior to the use of far-field ABRs. LS-CE-Chirp® ABR represents a recent development of classical ABR. Acoustic energy from the LS-CE-Chirp® stimulus reaches all regions of the cochlea at approximately the same time, thus yielding enhanced neural synchronicity and faster detection of larger amplitude wave V.

Keywords

Vestibular schwannoma/hearing preservation Vestibular schwannoma/ABR Vestibular schwannoma/CNAP Vestibular schwannoma/surgery Vestibular schwannoma/LS-CE-Chirp ABR 

References

  1. 1.
    Ahsan SF, Huq F, Seidman M, Taylor A. Long-term hearing preservation after resection of vestibular schwannoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38(10):1505–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carlson ML, Vivas EX, McCracken DJ, Sweeney AD, Neff BA, Shepard NT, et al. Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on Hearing Preservation Outcomes in Patients With Sporadic Vestibular Schwannomas. Neurosurgery. 2018;82(2):E35–E9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the evaluation of hearing preservation in acoustic neuroma (vestibular schwannoma). American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, INC. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;113(3):179–80.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gardner G, Robertson JH. Hearing preservation in unilateral acoustic neuroma surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1988;97(1):55–66.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hadjipanayis CG, Carlson ML, Link MJ, Rayan TA, Parish J, Atkins T, et al. Congress of neurological surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines on surgical resection for the treatment of patients with vestibular schwannomas. Neurosurgery. 2018;82(2):E40–E3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Golfinos JG, Hill TC, Rokosh R, Choudhry O, Shinseki M, Mansouri A, et al. A matched cohort comparison of clinical outcomes following microsurgical resection or stereotactic radiosurgery for patients with small- and medium-sized vestibular schwannomas. J Neurosurg. 2016;125(6):1472–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoa M, Drazin D, Hanna G, Schwartz MS, Lekovic GP. The approach to the patient with incidentally diagnosed vestibular schwannoma. Neurosurg Focus. 2012;33(3):E2.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stangerup SE, Thomsen J, Tos M, Cayé-Thomasen P. Long-term hearing preservation in vestibular schwannoma. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31(2):271–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patnaik U, Prasad SC, Tutar H, Giannuzzi AL, Russo A, Sanna M. The long-term outcomes of wait-and-scan and the role of radiotherapy in the management of vestibular schwannomas. Otol Neurotol. 2015;36(4):638–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prasad SC, Patnaik U, Grinblat G, Giannuzzi A, Piccirillo E, Taibah A, et al. Decision making in the wait-and-scan approach for vestibular schwannomas: is there a price to pay in terms of hearing, facial nerve, and overall outcomes? Neurosurgery. 2018;83(5):858–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mazzoni A, Biroli F, Foresti C, Signorelli A, Sortino C, Zanoletti E. Hearing preservation surgery in acoustic neuroma. Slow progress and new strategies. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2011;31(2):76–84.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang J, Grayeli AB, Barylyak R, Elgarem H. Functional outcome of retrosigmoid approach in vestibular schwannoma surgery. Acta Otolaryngol. 2008;128(8):881–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Samii M, Gerganov V, Samii A. Improved preservation of hearing and facial nerve function in vestibular schwannoma surgery via the retrosigmoid approach in a series of 200 patients. J Neurosurg. 2006;105(4):527–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wanibuchi M, Fukushima T, Friedman AH, Watanabe K, Akiyama Y, Mikami T, et al. Hearing preservation surgery for vestibular schwannomas via the retrosigmoid transmeatal approach: surgical tips. Neurosurg Rev. 2014;37(3):431–44; discussion 44.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Di Maio S, Malebranche AD, Westerberg B, Akagami R. Hearing preservation after microsurgical resection of large vestibular schwannomas. Neurosurgery. 2011;68(3):632–40; discussion 40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Babbage MJ, Feldman MB, O’Beirne GA, Macfarlane MR, Bird PA. Patterns of hearing loss following retrosigmoid excision of unilateral vestibular schwannoma. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2013;74(3):166–75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mazzoni A, Zanoletti E, Calabrese V. Hearing preservation surgery in acoustic neuroma: long-term results. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2012;32(2):98–102.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nakamizo A, Mori M, Inoue D, Amano T, Mizoguchi M, Yoshimoto K, et al. Long-term hearing outcome after retrosigmoid removal of vestibular schwannoma. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2013;53(10):688–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Strauss C, Bischoff B, Neu M, Berg M, Fahlbusch R, Romstöck J. Vasoactive treatment for hearing preservation in acoustic neuroma surgery. J Neurosurg. 2001;95(5):771–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vivas EX, Carlson ML, Neff BA, Shepard NT, McCracken DJ, Sweeney AD, et al. Congress of neurological surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines on intraoperative cranial nerve monitoring in vestibular schwannoma surgery. Neurosurgery. 2018;82(2):E44–E6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Di Scipio E, Mastronardi L. CE-Chirp® ABR in cerebellopontine angle surgery neuromonitoring: technical assessment in four cases. Neurosurg Rev. 2015;38(2):381–4; discussion 4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mastronardi L, Di Scipio E, Cacciotti G, Roperto R. Vestibular schwannoma and hearing preservation: usefulness of level specific CE-Chirp ABR monitoring. A retrospective study on 25 cases with preoperative socially useful hearing. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018;165:108–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Youssef AS, Downes AE. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in vestibular schwannoma surgery: advances and clinical implications. Neurosurg Focus. 2009;27(4):E9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hummel M, Perez J, Hagen R, Gelbrich G, Ernestus RI, Matthies C. Auditory monitoring in vestibular schwannoma surgery: intraoperative development and outcome. World Neurosurg. 2016;96:444–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Elberling C, Don M. Auditory brainstem responses to a chirp stimulus designed from derived-band latencies in normal-hearing subjects. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008;124(5):3022–37.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Elberling C, Don M, Cebulla M, Stürzebecher E. Auditory steady-state responses to chirp stimuli based on cochlear traveling wave delay. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;122(5):2772–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yamakami I, Yoshinori H, Saeki N, Wada M, Oka N. Hearing preservation and intraoperative auditory brainstem response and cochlear nerve compound action potential monitoring in the removal of small acoustic neurinoma via the retrosigmoid approach. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2009;80(2):218–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yamakami I, Oka N, Yamaura A. Intraoperative monitoring of cochlear nerve compound action potential in cerebellopontine angle tumour removal. J Clin Neurosci. 2003;10(5):567–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yamakami I, Ushikubo O, Uchino Y, Kobayashi E, Saeki N, Yamaura A, et al. [Intraoperative monitoring of hearing function in the removal of cerebellopontine angle tumor: auditory brainstem response and cochlear nerve compound action potential]. No Shinkei Geka. 2002;30(3):275–82.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luciano Mastronardi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alberto Campione
    • 1
  • Ali Zomorodi
    • 2
  • Ettore Di Scipio
    • 3
  • Antonio Adornetti
    • 1
  • Takanori Fukushima
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgerySan Filippo Neri Hospital—ASLRoma1RomeItaly
  2. 2.Division of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical CenterCarolina Neuroscience InstituteRaleighUSA
  3. 3.Department of Neurology and NeurophysiologySan Filippo Neri Hospital—ASLRoma1RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations