Auditory Brainstem Implant in Adult Patient With Cochlear Ossification From Otosclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to describe auditory brainstem implantation in a case of extensive cochlear otosclerosis. PATIENT, INTERVENTION, AND RESULTS: A case is presented of a 65-year-old male with bilateral cochlear otosclerosis and profound sensorineural hearing loss. Imaging studies showed distorted cochlear anatomy bilaterally and ossification of cochlear ducts. He underwent successful placement of an auditory brainstem implant using a retrosigmoid craniotomy approach. CONCLUSIONS: Extensive cochlear otosclerosis may distort cochlear anatomy such that cochlear implantation is expected to have a poor outcome. Auditory brainstem implantation may be an additional treatment option in these patients.

Bilateral Auditory Brainstem Implants in Patients With Neurofibromatosis 2.

OBJECTIVE: To discuss indications for bilateral auditory brainstem implants (ABIs), compare audiometric outcomes of unilateral vs bilateral ABIs, and determine if patients have improved outcomes with addition of a second-side implant. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of 24 patients with neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2) who underwent sequential placement of ABIs from 1989 to 2019. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. METHODS: Charts were reviewed for indication for second-side surgery, use of implants, and audiometric outcomes. Implants placed in the past 30 years were included in the study. Northwestern University Children's Perception of Speech (NU-CHIPS) and/or City University of New York (CUNY) sentence scores were compared in unilateral and bilateral conditions. RESULTS: Indications for a second-side implant included first-side implants with severe nonauditory symptoms (11), marginal audiometric results (9), outdated technology (2), or deterioration of first side (2). Seven patients are bilateral users and 1 patient discontinued bilateral use after a year due to no significant improvement over unilateral use. One patient with initial bilateral use was lost to follow-up. Thirteen patients are unilateral users due to nonaudiometric side effects or poor audiometric outcomes with the first side. Two patients are complete nonusers. Seventy-five percent had improved audiometric outcomes after the second-side implant, and 20% had stable findings. CONCLUSIONS: Second-side ABIs should be consider in patients with poor performance from a first-side implant. Most patients demonstrate subjective improvement with the second ABI. More research is needed for better objective assessments of improvements.