Cargando…

Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons

OBJECTIVE: To report the authors’ experience in a series of patients treated with cochlear implant (CI) revision surgery due to medical problems. METHODS: Revision CI surgeries performed in a tertiary referral centre for medical reasons not related to skin conditions were reviewed; patients were inc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Canzano, Federica, Di Lella, Filippo, Guida, Maurizio, Pasanisi, Enrico, Govoni, Marzo, Falcioni, Maurizio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Pacini Editore Srl 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978301/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36860152
http://dx.doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-N2096
_version_ 1784899491051077632
author Canzano, Federica
Di Lella, Filippo
Guida, Maurizio
Pasanisi, Enrico
Govoni, Marzo
Falcioni, Maurizio
author_facet Canzano, Federica
Di Lella, Filippo
Guida, Maurizio
Pasanisi, Enrico
Govoni, Marzo
Falcioni, Maurizio
author_sort Canzano, Federica
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To report the authors’ experience in a series of patients treated with cochlear implant (CI) revision surgery due to medical problems. METHODS: Revision CI surgeries performed in a tertiary referral centre for medical reasons not related to skin conditions were reviewed; patients were included if device removal was required. RESULTS: 17 cochlear implant patients were reviewed. The main reasons requiring revision surgery with device removal were: retraction pocket/iatrogenic cholesteatoma (6/17), chronic otitis (3/17), extrusion in previous canal wall down procedures (2/17) or in previous subtotal petrosectomy (2/17), misplacement/partial array insertion (2/17) and residual petrous bone cholesteatoma (2/17). In all cases surgery was performed through a subtotal petrosectomy. Cochlear fibrosis/ossification of the basal turn was found in 5 cases and uncovered mastoid portion of the facial nerve in 3 patients. The only complication was an abdominal seroma. A positive difference was observed between the number of active electrodes and comfort levels before and after revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In CI revision surgeries performed for medical reasons, subtotal petrosectomy offers invaluable advantages and should be considered as first choice during surgical planning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9978301
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Pacini Editore Srl
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99783012023-03-03 Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons Canzano, Federica Di Lella, Filippo Guida, Maurizio Pasanisi, Enrico Govoni, Marzo Falcioni, Maurizio Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Otology OBJECTIVE: To report the authors’ experience in a series of patients treated with cochlear implant (CI) revision surgery due to medical problems. METHODS: Revision CI surgeries performed in a tertiary referral centre for medical reasons not related to skin conditions were reviewed; patients were included if device removal was required. RESULTS: 17 cochlear implant patients were reviewed. The main reasons requiring revision surgery with device removal were: retraction pocket/iatrogenic cholesteatoma (6/17), chronic otitis (3/17), extrusion in previous canal wall down procedures (2/17) or in previous subtotal petrosectomy (2/17), misplacement/partial array insertion (2/17) and residual petrous bone cholesteatoma (2/17). In all cases surgery was performed through a subtotal petrosectomy. Cochlear fibrosis/ossification of the basal turn was found in 5 cases and uncovered mastoid portion of the facial nerve in 3 patients. The only complication was an abdominal seroma. A positive difference was observed between the number of active electrodes and comfort levels before and after revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In CI revision surgeries performed for medical reasons, subtotal petrosectomy offers invaluable advantages and should be considered as first choice during surgical planning. Pacini Editore Srl 2023-02-28 2023-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9978301/ /pubmed/36860152 http://dx.doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-N2096 Text en Società Italiana di Otorinolaringoiatria e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the CC-BY-NC-ND (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International) license. The article can be used by giving appropriate credit and mentioning the license, but only for non-commercial purposes and only in the original version. For further information: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en
spellingShingle Otology
Canzano, Federica
Di Lella, Filippo
Guida, Maurizio
Pasanisi, Enrico
Govoni, Marzo
Falcioni, Maurizio
Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
title Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
title_full Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
title_fullStr Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
title_full_unstemmed Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
title_short Revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
title_sort revision cochlear implant surgery for clinical reasons
topic Otology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978301/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36860152
http://dx.doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-N2096
work_keys_str_mv AT canzanofederica revisioncochlearimplantsurgeryforclinicalreasons
AT dilellafilippo revisioncochlearimplantsurgeryforclinicalreasons
AT guidamaurizio revisioncochlearimplantsurgeryforclinicalreasons
AT pasanisienrico revisioncochlearimplantsurgeryforclinicalreasons
AT govonimarzo revisioncochlearimplantsurgeryforclinicalreasons
AT falcionimaurizio revisioncochlearimplantsurgeryforclinicalreasons