• Journal of neurosurgery · Jul 2013

    Durability of hearing preservation after microsurgical treatment of vestibular schwannoma using the middle cranial fossa approach.

    • Anthony C Wang, Steven B Chinn, Khoi D Than, H Alexander Arts, Steven A Telian, Hussam K El-Kashlan, and B Gregory Thompson.
    • Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5338, USA.
    • J. Neurosurg.. 2013 Jul 1;119(1):131-8.

    ObjectThe middle cranial fossa (MCF) approach is a microsurgical technique described as a primary option in the treatment of small, intracanalicular schwannomas involving the eighth cranial nerve. Excellent rates of complete tumor resection, hearing preservation, preservation of facial nerve function, and low complication rates have been reproduced using this technique. However, the durability of hearing preservation attained using the various treatment options has not been adequately assessed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the durability of long-term hearing preservation in patients with vestibular schwannoma (VS) treated via the MCF approach. The authors hypothesize that hearing preservation in these patients will prove to be durable years after treatment in a high percentage of cases.MethodsRetrospective medical chart review was performed in 103 consecutive patients undergoing resection of VS via a modified MCF approach between 1999 and 2008. Patients in whom surgical goals were gross-total resection and hearing preservation were included. Preoperative and postoperative hearing assessment was performed using standard audiometric testing, and classified according to American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) guidelines as a primary outcome measure. Outcomes and neurological complications initially, and at 1, 3, and 5 years following operation were analyzed.ResultsInitial hearing preservation rates were in keeping with the best previously published results. At initial postoperative audiometric follow-up, of the patients presenting with Class A hearing, 67% remained Class A, 17% were Class B, 1% were Class C, and 15% were Class D. Of patients presenting with Class B hearing, 24% were Class A, 53% remained Class B, 6% were Class C, and 18% were Class D. Of patients presenting with Class C hearing, 100% remained Class C. To assess the durability of hearing preservation in our patients, the authors evaluated hearing function at regular intervals after the initial postoperative audiometric follow-up. Audiometric data were available for 56 patients at 5-year follow-up. Of the 20 patients with Class A hearing at initial postoperative follow-up with 5-year follow-up, 13 (65%) remained Class A, 6 (30%) were Class B, and 1 (5%) was Class C. Of the 12 patients with Class B hearing at initial postoperative follow-up with 5-year follow-up, 4 (33%) were Class A, 4 (33%) remained Class B, and 4 (33%) were Class C. Of the 3 patients with Class C hearing at initial postoperative follow-up with 5-year follow-up, all 3 (100%) remained Class C.ConclusionsA majority of patients with preserved hearing following the MCF approach for treatment of VS experience durability of their preserved hearing at 5-year follow-up. The initial AAO-HNS classification was preserved in 13 (65%) of the 20 patients who had Class A hearing at 5 years, and in 8 (67%) of the 12 who had Class B hearing at 5 years. Overall, a decline in AAO-HNS classification was noted in 15% of patients with preserved Class A hearing, and in 33% of those with preserved Class B hearing. Facial nerve function was preserved in 91% of cases. Superior hearing preservation as well as good outcomes in facial nerve function and few serious complications can be accomplished using the MCF approach for resection of small VSs.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…