Differences in Hearing, Balance, and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Petroclival Versus Nonpetroclival Posterior Fossa Meningiomas.

OBJECTIVE: To compare hearing, tinnitus, balance, and quality-of-life treatment outcomes of petroclival meningioma and nonpetroclival cerebellopontine angle meningioma cohorts. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of 60 patients with posterior fossa meningiomas, 25 petroclival and 35 nonpetroclival, who were treated at a single tertiary care center between 2000 and 2020. INTERVENTION: A survey battery that included the Hearing Effort of the Tumor Ear, Speech and Spatial Qualities of Hearing, Tinnitus Functional Index, Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), and Short Form Health Survey. Petroclival and nonpetroclival cohorts were matched for tumor size and demographic features. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences between groups in hearing, balance outcomes, and quality of life and patient factors that influence posttreatment quality of life. RESULTS: Petroclival meningioma patients reported poorer audiovestibular outcomes with a higher rate of deafness in the tumor ear (36.0% versus 8.6%, p = 0.032) and lower functional hearing by the Hearing Effort of the Tumor Ear, Speech and Spatial Qualities of Hearing (76.6 [6.1] versus 82.0 [4.4], p < 0.001). Current dizziness rate was higher (48.0% versus 23.5%, p = 0.05), with more severe dizziness by DHI (18.4 [4.8] versus 5.7 [2.2], p < 0.001). Both cohorts had similar high quality of life and low tinnitus severity indices. Quality-of-life Short Form Health Survey predictors were tumor size ( p = 0.012) and DHI ( p = 0.005) in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing and dizziness treatment outcomes of petroclival meningioma are poorer relative to other posterior fossa meningiomas. Despite audiovestibular outcome distinctions, the overall posttreatment quality of life was high for both petroclival and nonpetroclival meningioma.

Treated large posterior fossa vestibular schwannoma and meningioma: Hearing outcome and willingness-to-accept brain implant for unilateral deafness.

Background/Objective: To compare functional hearing and tinnitus outcomes in treated large (~ 3 cm) vestibular schwannoma (VS) and posterior fossa meningioma cohorts, and construct willingness-to-accept profiles for an experimental brain implant to treat unilateral hearing loss. Methods: A two-way MANOVA model with two independent variables (tumor type; time from treatment) and three dependent variables (hearing effort of tumor ear; abbreviated Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12); Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI)) was used to analyze data from VS (N = 32) and meningioma (N = 50) patients who were treated at a tertiary care center between 2010 and 2020. A query to probe acceptance of experimental treatment for hearing loss relative to expected benefit was used to construct willingness-to-accept profiles. Results: Tumor type was statistically significant on the combined dependent variables analysis (F[3, 76] = 19.172, p < .0005, Wilks' Λ = 0.569). Meningioma showed better outcome for hearing effort (F[1, 76] = 14.632, p < .0005) and SSQ12 (F[1, 76] = 16.164, p < .0005), but not for TFI (F[1, 76] = 1.247, p = .268) on univariate two-way ANOVA analyses. Superior hearing effort and SSQ12 indices in the short-term (< 2 years) persisted in the long-term (> 2 years) (p ≤ .017). At the 60% speech understanding level, 77% of respondents would accept an experimental brain implant. Conclusion: Hearing outcome is better for posterior fossa meningioma compared to VS. Most patients with hearing loss in the tumor ear would consider a brain implant if the benefit level would be comparable to a cochlear implant. Level of Evidence: 2.