Unilateral Multifocal Inner Ear and Internal Auditory Canal or Cerebellopontine Angle Cochleovestibular Schwannomas-Genetic Analysis and Management by Surgical Resection and Cochlear Implantation.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the genetic characteristics and the management of two very rare cases of unilateral multifocal inner ear and internal auditory canal or cerebellopontine angle cochleovestibular schwannomas not being associated to full neurofibromatosis type 2-related schwannomatosis. PATIENTS: In a 29-year-old man and a 55-year-old woman with single-sided deafness multifocal unilateral cochleovestibular schwannomas were surgically resected, and hearing was rehabilitated with a cochlear implant (CI). Unaffected tissue was analyzed using next generation sequencing of the NF2 gene. Tumor tissue was analyzed using a 340-parallel sequencing gene panel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mutations in the NF2 gene, word recognition score for monosyllables at 65 dB SPL (WRS 65 ) with CI. RESULTS: No disease-causing mutation was detected in the examined sequences in blood leucokytes. All tumor samples revealed, among others, somatic pathogenic NF2 mutations. While the anatomically separate tumors in case 1 were likely molecular identical, the tumors in case 2 showed different genetic patterns. WRS 65 was 55% at 6 years of follow-up and 60% at 4.5 years of follow-up, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of multifocal unilateral cochleovestibular schwannomas without pathogenic variants in NF2 in non-affected blood leucocytes can be associated with mosaic NF2 -related schwannomatosis (case 1), or with likely sporadic mutations (case 2) and may be overlooked due to their extreme rarity. Although challenging, successful hearing rehabilitation could be achieved through surgical resection of the tumors and cochlear implantation.

Safety and audiological outcome in a case series of tertiary therapy of sudden hearing loss with a biodegradable drug delivery implant for controlled release of dexamethasone to the inner ear.

Background: Intratympanic injections of glucocorticoids have become increasingly common in the treatment of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL). However, due to their fast elimination, sustained applications have been suggested for local drug delivery to the inner ear. Materials and methods: The study is based on a retrospective chart review of patients treated for ISSHL at a single tertiary (university) referral center. We included patients who were treated with a solid, biodegradable, poly(D,L-lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA)-based drug delivery system providing sustained delivery of dexamethasone extracochlear into the round window niche (n = 15) or intracochlear into scala tympani (n = 2) for tertiary therapy of ISSHL in patients without serviceable hearing after primary systemic and secondary intratympanic glucocorticoid therapy. We evaluated the feasibility and safety through clinical evaluation, histological examination, and functional tests [pure-tone threshold (PTA), word recognition scores (WRS)]. Results: With adequate surgical preparation of the round window niche, implantation was feasible in all patients. Histologic examination of the material in the round window niche showed signs of resorption without relevant inflammation or foreign body reaction to the implant. In patients where the basal part of scala tympani was assessable during later cochlear implantation, no pathological findings were found. In the patients with extracochlear application, average preoperative PTA was 84.7 dB HL (SD: 20.0) and 76.7 dB HL (SD: 16.7) at follow-up (p = 0.08). The preoperative average maximum WRS was 14.6% (SD: 17.9) and 39.3% (SD: 30.7) at follow-up (p = 0.11). Six patients (40%), however, reached serviceable hearing. The two patients with intracochlear application did not improve. Conclusion: The extracochlear application of the controlled release system in the round window niche and - based on limited observations - intracochlear implantation into scala tympani appears feasible and safe. Due to the uncontrolled study design, conclusions about the efficacy of the treatment are limited. These observations, however, may encourage the initiation of prospective controlled studies using biodegradable controlled release implants as drug delivery systems for the treatment of inner ear diseases.

Intratympanic corticosteroids for sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is common, and defined as a sudden decrease in sensorineural hearing sensitivity of unknown aetiology. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used, however their value remains unclear. Intratympanic injections of corticosteroids have become increasingly common in the treatment of ISSNHL. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intratympanic corticosteroids in people with ISSNHL. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2021, Issue 9); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials (search date 23 September 2021). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with ISSNHL and follow-up of over a week. Intratympanic corticosteroids were given as primary or secondary treatment (after failure of systemic therapy). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods, including GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcome was change in hearing threshold with pure tone audiometry. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of people whose hearing improved, final hearing threshold, speech audiometry, frequency-specific hearing changes and adverse effects. MAIN RESULTS: We included 30 studies, comprising 2133 analysed participants. Some studies had more than two treatment arms and were therefore relevant to several comparisons. Studies investigated intratympanic corticosteroids as either primary (initial) therapy or secondary (rescue) therapy after failure of initial treatment. 1. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus systemic corticosteroids as primary therapy We identified 16 studies (1108 participants). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no improvement in the change in hearing threshold (mean difference (MD) -5.93 dB better, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.61 to -4.26; 10 studies; 701 participants; low-certainty). We found little to no difference in the proportion of participants whose hearing was improved (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12; 14 studies; 972 participants; moderate-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in little to no difference in the final hearing threshold (MD -3.31 dB, 95% CI -6.16 to -0.47; 7 studies; 516 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may increase the number of people who experience vertigo or dizziness (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.41 to 4.54; 1 study; 250 participants; low-certainty) and probably increases the number of people with ear pain (RR 15.68, 95% CI 6.22 to 39.49; 2 studies; 289 participants; moderate-certainty). It also resulted in persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 3.9%; 3 studies; 359 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo/dizziness at the time of injection (1% to 21%, 3 studies; 197 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (10.5% to 27.1%; 2 studies; 289 participants; low-certainty). 2. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as primary therapy We identified 10 studies (788 participants). Combined therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -8.55 dB better, 95% CI -12.48 to -4.61; 6 studies; 435 participants; low-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain as to whether combined therapy changes the proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41; 10 studies; 788 participants; very low-certainty). Combined therapy may result in slightly lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds but the evidence is very uncertain, and it is not clear whether the change would be important to patients (MD -9.11 dB, 95% CI -16.56 to -1.67; 3 studies; 194 participants; very low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received combined therapy. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 5.5%; 5 studies; 474 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 0% to 8.1%; 4 studies; 341 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (13.5%; 1 study; 73 participants; very low-certainty).  3. Intratympanic corticosteroids versus no treatment or placebo as secondary therapy We identified seven studies (279 participants). Intratympanic therapy may have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold (MD -9.07 dB better, 95% CI -11.47 to -6.66; 7 studies; 280 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved (RR 5.55, 95% CI 2.89 to 10.68; 6 studies; 232 participants; low-certainty). Intratympanic therapy may result in lower (more favourable) final hearing thresholds (MD -11.09 dB, 95% CI -17.46 to -4.72; 5 studies; 203 participants; low-certainty). Some adverse effects only occurred in those who received intratympanic injection. These included persistent tympanic membrane perforation (range 0% to 4.2%; 5 studies; 185 participants; very low-certainty), vertigo or dizziness at the time of injection (range 6.7% to 33%; 3 studies; 128 participants; very low-certainty) and ear pain at the time of injection (0%; 1 study; 44 participants; very low-certainty).  4. Intratympanic plus systemic corticosteroids (combined therapy) versus systemic corticosteroids alone as secondary therapy We identified one study with 76 participants. Change in hearing threshold was not reported. Combined therapy may result in a higher proportion with hearing improvement, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.55; very low-certainty). Adverse effects were poorly reported with only data for persistent tympanic membrane perforation (rate 8.1%, very low-certainty). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Most of the evidence in this review is low- or very low-certainty, therefore it is likely that further studies may change our conclusions.   For primary therapy, intratympanic corticosteroids may have little or no effect compared with systemic corticosteroids. There may be a slight benefit from combined treatment when compared with systemic treatment alone, but the evidence is uncertain. For secondary therapy, there is low-certainty evidence that intratympanic corticosteroids, when compared to no treatment or placebo, may result in a much higher proportion of participants whose hearing is improved, but may only have a small effect on the change in hearing threshold. It is very uncertain whether there is additional benefit from combined treatment over systemic steroids alone. Although adverse effects were poorly reported, the different risk profiles of intratympanic treatment (including tympanic membrane perforation, pain and dizziness/vertigo) and systemic treatment (for example, blood glucose problems) should be considered when selecting appropriate treatment.

Microimaging of a novel intracochlear drug delivery device in combination with cochlear implants in the human inner ear.

The effective delivery of drugs to the inner ear is still an unmet medical need. Local controlled drug delivery to this sensory organ is challenging due to its location in the petrous bone, small volume, tight barriers, and high vulnerability. Local intracochlear delivery of drugs would overcome the limitations of intratympanic (extracochlear) and systemic drug application. The requirements for such a delivery system include small size, appropriate flexibility, and biodegradability. We have developed biodegradable PLGA-based implants for controlled intracochlear drug release that can also be used in combination with cochlear implants (CIs), which are implantable neurosensory prosthesis for hearing rehabilitation. The drug carrier system was tested for implantation in the human inner ear in 11 human temporal bones. In five of the temporal bones, CI arrays from different manufacturers were implanted before insertion of the biodegradable PLGA implants. The drug carrier system and CI arrays were implanted into the scala tympani through the round window. Implanted temporal bones were evaluated by ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (µ-CT) to illustrate the position of implanted electrode carriers and the drug carrier system. The µ-CT measurements revealed the feasibility of implanting the PLGA implants into the scala tympani of the human inner ear and co-administration of the biodegradable PLGA implant with a CI array.

Metabolic reprogramming of inner ear cell line HEI-OC1 after dexamethasone application.

INTRODUCTION: One approach to dampen the inflammatory reactions resulting from implantation surgery of cochlear implant hearing aids is to embed dexamethasone into the matrix of the electrode carrier. Possible side effects for sensory cells in the inner ear on the metabolomics have not yet been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: We examined changes in the metabolome of the HEI-OC1 cell line after dexamethasone incubation as a cell model of sensory cells of the inner ear. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Untargeted GC-MS-profiling of metabolic alterations after dexamethasone treatment showed that dexamethasone had antithetical effects on the metabolic signature of the cells depending on growth conditions. The differentiated state of HEI-OC1 cells is better suited for elucidating metabolic changes induced by external factors. Dexamethasone treatment of differentiated cells led to an increase in intracellular amino acids and enhanced glucose uptake and ß-oxidation in the cells. Increased availability of precursors for glycolysis and ATP production by ß-oxidation stabilizes the energy supply in the cells, which could be assumed to be beneficial in coping with cellular stress. We found no negative effects of dexamethasone on the metabolic level, and changes may even prepare sensory cells to better overcome cellular stress following implantation surgery.

How Much Cochlea Do You Need for Cochlear Implantation?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of cochlear implantation (CI) after surgical removal of sporadic intracochlear or intravestibulocochlear schwannomas. STUDY DESIGN: Nonconcurrent cohort study. SETTING: Monocentric study at a tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Patients with tumor resection and CI between 2011 and 2018 and a historic control group of CI patients matched by age, CI electrode type, and follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Partial or subtotal cochleoectomy for tumor removal and single-stage CI. OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measure: word recognition score for monosyllables in quiet at 65 dB SPL. RESULTS: Sixteen patients with tumor removal and CI (6 female, 10 male; mean age 55 ±â€Š14 years) and 16 control patients (6 female, 10 male; mean age 55 ±â€Š15 years) were identified. In the tumor group, surprisingly good word recognition scores were reached even after substantial structural defects in the cochlear capsule. While 12 months after cochlear implantation mean word recognition score for monosyllables in quiet was 58% (SD: 26) and 41% (SD: 26) in the control groups, it was 75% (SD: 19%) in the tumor group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intracochlear schwannomas, despite substantial structural damage to the cochlear capsule by partial or subtotal cochleoectomy, a tendency toward better performance with respect to word recognition with CI was observed as compared with other CI patients. The surprisingly good functional results despite substantial cochlear trauma may change clinical thinking with respect to cochlear implantation also beyond this special indication.

The in-air auditory thresholds of the eurasian otter (Lutra lutra, L. 1758) as determined by auditory brainstem responses.

As of yet there is no literature record of the hearing range of the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra, L. 1758), a key species for natural conservation efforts in Europe. We recorded in-air pure tone hearing thresholds of anaesthetized otters using auditory brainstem responses (ABR) and report the results of the Eurasian otter. The recorded potentials showed the typical mammalian auditory brainstem response consisting of 5 distinct positive peaks during the first 10 ms after stimulus onset. At 80 dB SPL the hearing ranged from around 200 Hz to 32 kHz, with lowest thresholds around 4 kHz.

Long-Term in vivo Release Profile of Dexamethasone-Loaded Silicone Rods Implanted Into the Cochlea of Guinea Pigs.

Glucocorticoids are used intra-operatively in cochlear implant surgeries to reduce the inflammatory reaction caused by insertion trauma and the foreign body response against the electrode carrier after cochlear implantation. To prevent higher systemic concentrations of glucocorticoids that might cause undesirable systemic side effects, the drug should be applied locally. Since rapid clearance of glucocorticoids occurs in the inner ear fluid spaces, sustained application is supposedly more effective in suppressing foreign body and tissue reactions and in preserving neuronal structures. Embedding of the glucocorticoid dexamethasone into the cochlear implant electrode carrier and its continuous release may solve this problem. The aim of the present study was to examine how dexamethasone concentrations in the electrode carrier influence drug levels in the perilymph at different time points. Silicone rods were implanted through a cochleostomy into the basal turn of the scala tympani of guinea pigs. The silicone rods were loaded homogeneously with 0.1, 1, and 10% concentrations of dexamethasone. After implantation, dexamethasone concentrations in perilymph and cochlear tissue were measured at several time points over a period of up to 7 weeks. The kinetic was concentration-dependent and showed an initial burst release in the 10%- and the 1%-dexamethasone-loaded electrode carrier dummies. The 10%-loaded electrode carrier resulted in a more elevated and longer lasting burst release than the 1%-loaded carrier. Following this initial burst release phase, sustained dexamethasone levels of about 60 and 100 ng/ml were observed in the perilymph for the 1 and 10% loaded rods, respectively, during the remainder of the observation time. The 0.1% loaded carrier dummy achieved very low perilymph drug levels of about 0.5 ng/ml. The cochlear tissue drug concentration shows a similar dynamic to the perilymph drug concentration, but only reaches about 0.005-0.05% of the perilymph drug concentration. Dexamethasone can be released from silicone electrode carrier dummies in a controlled and sustained way over a period of several weeks, leading to constant drug concentrations in the scala tympani perilymph. No accumulation of dexamethasone was observed in the cochlear tissue. In consideration of experimental studies using similar drug depots and investigating physiological effects, an effective dose range between 50 and 100 ng/ml after burst release is suggested for the CI insertion trauma model.

Hearing Changes After Intratympanic Steroids for Secondary (Salvage) Therapy of Sudden Hearing Loss: A Meta-Analysis Using Mathematical Simulations of Drug Delivery Protocols.

OBJECTIVE: The use of glucocorticoids for secondary (salvage/rescue) therapy of idiopathic sudden hearing loss (ISSHL), including controlled and uncontrolled studies with intratympanic injections or continuous, catheter mediated applications, were evaluated by means of a meta-analysis in an attempt to define optimal local drug delivery protocols for ISSHL. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 30 studies with 33 treatment groups between January 2000 and June 2014 were selected based on sufficiently detailed description of application protocols. Cochlear drug levels were calculated by a validated computer model of drug dispersion in the inner ear fluids based on the concentration and volume of glucocorticoids applied, the time drug remained in the middle ear, and on the specific timing of injections. Various factors were compared with hearing outcome, including baseline data, individual parameters of the application protocols, calculated peak concentration (Cmax), and total dose (area under the curve, AUC). RESULTS: There was no dependence of hearing outcome on individual parameters of the application protocol, Cmax or AUC. Hearing gain and final hearing thresholds were independent of treatment delay. CONCLUSION: Based on the available data from uncontrolled and controlled randomized and non-randomized studies no clear recommendation can be made so far for a specific application protocol for either primary or secondary (salvage) intratympanic steroid treatment in patients with ISSHL. For meta-analyses, change in pure tone average (PTA) may not be an adequate outcome parameter to assess effectiveness of the intervention especially with inhomogeneity of patient populations. Final PTA might provide a better outcome parameter.

Controlled drug release to the inner ear: Concepts, materials, mechanisms, and performance.

Progress in drug delivery to the ear has been achieved over the last few years. This review illustrates the main mechanisms of controlled drug release and the resulting geometry- and size-dependent release kinetics. The potency, physicochemical properties, and stability of the drug molecules are key parameters for designing the most suitable drug delivery system. The most important drug delivery systems for the inner ear include solid foams, hydrogels, and different nanoscale drug delivery systems (e.g., nanoparticles, liposomes, lipid nanocapsules, polymersomes). Their main characteristics (i.e., general structure and materials) are discussed, with special attention given to underlining the link between the physicochemical properties (e.g., surface areas, glass transition temperature, microviscosity, size, and shape) and release kinetics. An appropriate characterization of the drug, the excipients used, and the formulated drug delivery systems is necessary to achieve a deeper understanding of the release process and decrease variability originating from the drug delivery system. This task cannot be solved by otologists alone. The interdisciplinary cooperation between otology/neurotology, pharmaceutics, physics, and other disciplines will result in improved drug delivery systems for the inner ear.

Hearing Changes After Intratympanically Applied Steroids for Primary Therapy of Sudden Hearing Loss: A Meta-analysis Using Mathematical Simulations of Drug Delivery Protocols.

OBJECTIVE: Controlled and uncontrolled studies with primary intratympanic or combined intratympanic and systemic application of glucocorticosteroids for idiopathic sudden hearing loss were analyzed by means of a meta-analysis in an attempt to establish optimal local drug delivery protocols. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 25 studies with 28 treatment groups between January 2000 and June 2014 were selected that adequately described drug delivery protocols. Cochlear drug levels were calculated by a validated computer model of drug dispersion in the inner ear fluids based on the concentration and volume of glucocorticoids applied, the time the drug remained in the middle ear, and the specific timing of injections. Various factors were compared with hearing outcome, including baseline data, individual parameters of the application protocols, calculated peak concentration (Cmax), and total dose (area under the curve). RESULTS: There was no dependence of hearing outcome on individual parameters of the application protocol, Cmax, or area under the curve. Final hearing threshold was notably independent of delay of treatment. CONCLUSION: During primary intratympanic or combined steroid therapy of idiopathic sudden hearing loss, the tendency toward early treatment having a positive effect on hearing improvement is thought to be a "sham effect," likely related to spontaneous recovery. Change in pure-tone average may not be an adequate outcome parameter to assess effectiveness of the intervention, as it depends on the degree of initial hearing loss. Final pure-tone average provides a better alternative.

The scotopic and photopic visual sensitivity in the nocturnal tree frog Agalychnis callidryas.

The red-eyed tree frog (Agalychnis callidryas) is endemic to the rainforests of Central America. During the night, it hunts for insects in the treetops whereas at daytime, the frogs rest under leaves. In the present study we determined the relative visual sensitivity spectrum of this nocturnal frog species by ERG recordings in both the dark- and light-adapted state. In both the scotopic- and photopic-sensitivity curve, we found only minor individual variations among the tested individuals. The sensitivity maximum of the scotopic curve was determined at 500 nm, which matches the absorption properties of the RH1-visual pigment expressed in the red rods of frogs. The sensitivity maximum of the photopic curve was found at 545 nm which is close to the absorption maximum of the LWS pigment type expressed in most cones of the frog retina. The threshold curves determined by ERG recordings here reveal no unusual features in the sensitivity spectrum of the red-eyed tree frog that could be interpreted as adaptations for its strictly nocturnal life style.