Staged implantation of active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing devices (BCHD) after explantation of older generation bone anchored hearing aids (BAHAs): Surgical outcomes and approach to management.

PURPOSE: To evaluate outcomes following explantation of percutaneous or transcutaneous bone conduction implants (pBCIs or tBCIs) and subsequent implantation of transcutaneous active bone conduction hearing devices (BCHDs); to provide guidance regarding staging of surgery and adjunctive procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective chart review of eight adult subjects (ten ears) with pBCIs or tBCIs who underwent explantation of their device and subsequent implantation with a BCHD [MED-EL BONEBRIDGE™ (n = 7, 70 %) or Cochlear™ Osia® (n = 3, 30 %)]. RESULTS: Reasons for pBCI or tBCI explantation were pain (60 %, 6/10), infection (60 %, 6/10), skin overgrowth (50 %, 5/10), and inability to obtain new processors (20 %, 2/10). Median time between pBCI or tBCI removal and BCHD staged implant was 4.7 (IQR 2.2-8.1) months. Two subjects developed complications following BCHD implantation. One had a persistent wound overlying the osseointegrated screw after removal of the pBCI abutment, requiring removal and temporalis rotational flap. Staged Osia® implantation was performed, but ultimately wound dehiscence developed over the device. The second subject experienced an infection after BONEBRIDGE™ implantation (32 days after pBCI explant), necessitating washout and treatment with intravenous antibiotics. There was subsequent device failure. CONCLUSION: The transition from a pBCI or tBCI to a novel transcutaneous device is nuanced. Staged pBCI or tBCI explantation and novel BCHD implantation with sufficient time for wound healing is vital. Adjunctive procedures to augment soft tissue in cases of prior attenuation may be required to avoid complications with larger internal devices.

Comparing Approaches for Repair of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence.

OBJECTIVE: Compare outcomes for subjects who underwent middle cranial fossa (MCF) or transmastoid (TM) repair of superior semicircular canal dehiscence (SSCD). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Quaternary-care, academic neurotology practice. METHODS: Subjects who underwent MCF or TM repair of SSCD between December 1999 and April 2023 were identified. Main outcome measures included demographic data, length of surgery and hospital stay, clinical presentation, and audiometric testing. RESULTS: Ninety-three subjects (97 ears) who underwent surgery for SSCD met inclusion criteria: 58.8% (57) via MCF, 39.2% (38) via TM, and 2.0% (2) via TM + MCF. Median operative time was shorter for the TM (35) compared to the MCF (29) approach (118 vs 151 minutes, P < .001). Additionally, median hospital stays were shorter for TM (36) compared to the MCF (56) approach (15.3 vs 67.7 hours, P < .001). Overall, 92% (49/53) of MCF and 92% (33/36) of TM surgeries resulted in an improvement or resolution of one or more symptoms (P = .84). There was no significant preoperative to postoperative change in the median air conduction pure-tone average (PTA), air-bone gap, or word recognition score in both the MCF and TM groups (P > .05). Improvements of >10 dB in the pre- to postoperative absolute change in bone conduction PTA were noted in 3 subjects in the MCF group and 4 subjects in the TM group (P = .49). CONCLUSION: The TM approach for SSCD demonstrates shorter operative times and length of hospital stay. The TM and MCF approaches have comparable audiometric and clinical outcomes.

Plain Language Summary: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

The plain language summary explains allergen immunotherapy to patients, families, and caregivers. The summary is for patients aged 5 years and older who are experiencing symptoms from inhalant allergies and are considering immunotherapy as a treatment option. It is based on the 2024 "Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy." This plain language summary is a companion publication to the full guideline, which provides greater detail for health care providers. Guidelines and their recommendations may not apply to every patient, but they can be used to find best practices and quality improvement opportunities.

Understanding Patient Utilization Patterns of Cochlear Implant Processors.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the extent of benefit the second processor provides and to better understand utilization patterns regarding cochlear implant (CI) sound processors. BACKGROUND: Institutional contracts determine the external CI sound processor hardware that a patient is eligible for. Despite the high prevalence of CI worldwide, there is a paucity in the literature regarding patient preferences and how patients utilize provided external hardware. METHODS: A close-ended, multiple-choice survey was mailed to all patients over the age of 18 years who underwent CI between 2016 to 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients who received their CI hardware prior to 2018 were provided 2 processors, whereas those who received their hardware in 2018 or later were provided 1 processor. RESULTS: A total of 100/263 surveys were returned for a response rate of 38.0%. Of the cohort with 1 processor, 31.3% experienced a period without a functioning processor and access to sound compared to 5.6% of the cohort with 2 processors (P = -.003). Of the cohort with 2 processors, 24.3% noted that they often or always utilize their second processor. When asked how important having a second processor was, 62.9% of the 2-processor group responded that it was very important (P = .001). The most common reason for utilizing the second processor was a damaged primary processor. Patients who received 2 processors had a significantly lower number of postoperative audiology clinic visits for device troubleshooting (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients who have 2 CI external processors identify this as being very important to them and experience significantly less time without access to sound due to lack of a functioning processor. As institutional contracts often dictate whether a patient will receive 1 or 2 sound processors with their CI hardware, it is important to understand patient preferences and utilization patterns in order to guide patient-centric policies.

MRI Safety of Stapes Prostheses: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) safety of stapes prostheses. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to November 2021 following PRISMA guidelines. REVIEW METHODS: Studies reporting evidence of stapes prosthesis displacement or interaction in adult or pediatric implant recipients undergoing MRI. Cadaveric, animal, and basic studies with nonhuman data were also included. RESULTS: From an initial search of 123 articles, 42 full-text studies were evaluated for eligibility and 19 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included. Motion artifact was reported in a few stainless steel prosthesis types in vitro; however, such displacement was not observed in human cadaver temporal bone studies and had no adverse reported outcomes. A small subgroup of patients in the 1980s received a ferromagnetic stainless steel stapes implant that was recalled and has not been used since 1987. Patients with implants performed in the 1980s should be directed to 1.5T scanners from an abundance of caution. CONCLUSION: Modern (post-1987) stapes prostheses do not pose a risk in vivo when exposed to the magnetic fields of MRI scanners.

Executive Summary of Clinical Practice Guideline on Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

OBJECTIVE: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The guideline development group made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The guideline development group made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitization, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The guideline development group offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Immunotherapy for Inhalant Allergy.

OBJECTIVE: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is the therapeutic exposure to an allergen or allergens selected by clinical assessment and allergy testing to decrease allergic symptoms and induce immunologic tolerance. Inhalant AIT is administered to millions of patients for allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) and is most commonly delivered as subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) or sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT). Despite its widespread use, there is variability in the initiation and delivery of safe and effective immunotherapy, and there are opportunities for evidence-based recommendations for improved patient care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. Specific goals of the guideline are to optimize patient care, promote safe and effective therapy, reduce unjustified variations in care, and reduce the risk of harm. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 5 years and older with AR, with or without AA, who are either candidates for immunotherapy or treated with immunotherapy for their inhalant allergies. The target audience is all clinicians involved in the administration of immunotherapy. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of inhaled allergies with immunotherapy. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The GDG made a strong recommendation that (Key Action Statement [KAS] 10) the clinician performing allergy skin testing or administering AIT must be able to diagnose and manage anaphylaxis. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should offer or refer to a clinician who can offer immunotherapy for patients with AR with or without AA if their patients' symptoms are inadequately controlled with medical therapy, allergen avoidance, or both, or have a preference for immunomodulation. (KAS 2A) Clinicians should not initiate AIT for patients who are pregnant, have uncontrolled asthma, or are unable to tolerate injectable epinephrine. (KAS 3) Clinicians should evaluate the patient or refer the patient to a clinician who can evaluate for signs and symptoms of asthma before initiating AIT and for signs and symptoms of uncontrolled asthma before administering subsequent AIT. (KAS 4) Clinicians should educate patients who are immunotherapy candidates regarding the differences between SCIT and SLIT (aqueous and tablet) including risks, benefits, convenience, and costs. (KAS 5) Clinicians should educate patients about the potential benefits of AIT in (1) preventing new allergen sensitizations, (2) reducing the risk of developing AA, and (3) altering the natural history of the disease with continued benefit after discontinuation of therapy. (KAS 6) Clinicians who administer SLIT to patients with seasonal AR should offer pre- and co-seasonal immunotherapy. (KAS 7) Clinicians prescribing AIT should limit treatment to only those clinically relevant allergens that correlate with the patient's history and are confirmed by testing. (KAS 9) Clinicians administering AIT should continue escalation or maintenance dosing when patients have local reactions (LRs) to AIT. (KAS 11) Clinicians should avoid repeat allergy testing as an assessment of the efficacy of ongoing AIT unless there is a change in environmental exposures or a loss of control of symptoms. (KAS 12) For patients who are experiencing symptomatic control from AIT, clinicians should treat for a minimum duration of 3 years, with ongoing treatment duration based on patient response to treatment. The GDG offered the following KASs as options: (KAS 2B) Clinicians may choose not to initiate AIT for patients who use concomitant beta-blockers, have a history of anaphylaxis, have systemic immunosuppression, or have eosinophilic esophagitis (SLIT only). (KAS 8) Clinicians may treat polysensitized patients with a limited number of allergens.

Salvage Microsurgery Following Failed Primary Radiosurgery in Sporadic Vestibular Schwannoma.

Importance: Management of sporadic vestibular schwannoma with radiosurgery is becoming increasingly common globally; however, limited data currently characterize patient outcomes in the setting of microsurgical salvage for radiosurgical failure. Objective: To describe the clinical outcomes of salvage microsurgery following failed primary stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) among patients with sporadic vestibular schwannoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cohort study of adults (≥18 years old) with sporadic vestibular schwannoma who underwent salvage microsurgery following failed primary SRS/FSRT in 7 vestibular schwannoma treatment centers across the US and Norway. Data collection was performed between July 2022 and January 2023, with data analysis performed between January and July 2023. Exposure: Salvage microsurgical tumor resection. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite outcome of undergoing less than gross total resection (GTR) or experiencing long-term facial paresis. Results: Among 126 patients, the median (IQR) age at time of salvage microsurgery was 62 (53-70) years, 69 (55%) were female, and 113 of 117 (97%) had tumors that extended into the cerebellopontine angle at time of salvage. Of 125 patients, 96 (76%) underwent primary gamma knife SRS, while 24 (19%) underwent linear accelerator-based SRS; the remaining patients underwent FSRT using other modalities. Postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak was seen in 15 of 126 patients (12%), hydrocephalus in 8 (6%), symptomatic stroke in 7 (6%), and meningitis in 2 (2%). Each 1-mm increase in cerebellopontine angle tumor size was associated with a 13% increased likelihood of foregoing GTR (64 of 102 patients [63%]) or long-term postoperative House-Brackmann grade higher than I (48 of 102 patients [47%]) (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.23). Following salvage microsurgery, tumor growth-free survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 97% (95% CI, 94%-100%), 93% (95% CI, 87%-99%), and 91% (95% CI, 84%-98%), respectively. Conclusions: In this cohort study, more than half of patients who received salvage microsurgery following primary SRS/FSRT underwent less than GTR or experienced some degree of facial paresis long term. These data suggest that the cumulative risk of developing facial paresis following primary SRS/FSRT by the end of the patient's journey with treatment approximates 2.5% to 7.5% when using published primary SRS/FSRT long-term tumor control rates.

Skin cancers of the external auditory canal.

Skin cancers of the external auditory canal are rare tumors treated by a variety of medical and surgical specialties. Treatment of skin cancer is generally successful; however, tumors involving this anatomic location can be aggressive and require a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. This multidisciplinary review provides facial plastic surgeons, caring for these patients, an updated approach to cancers of the external auditory canal focusing on findings that may indicate more aggressive disease and warrant expanded workup and treatment.

WITHDRAWN: Vestibular schwannoma: from a 'certain hard body' through the 'bloody angle' to hearing preservation surgery.

The Publisher regrets that this article is an accidental duplication of an article that has already been published, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.02.016. The duplicate article has therefore been withdrawn. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

The Effect of Social Deprivation on Patient Satisfaction in Otolaryngology Clinics.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple factors have been associated with lower satisfaction scores. We hypothesize that patients with a more deprived socioeconomic status will have different patient satisfaction scores than patients of higher socioeconomic status. METHODS: We reviewed Press Ganey satisfaction scores for new, outpatient visits between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. Due to the high ceiling effects of the survey, "satisfaction" was defined as achieving a perfect score of 100. We determined social deprivation using the 2015 Area Deprivation Index (ADI) which serves as a proxy for socioeconomic status derived from zip codes. Patient satisfaction was defined as a binary variable. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors correlated with patient satisfaction. RESULTS: There were 3239 unique new patients with completed surveys. Univariate analysis demonstrated decreased odds of achieving satisfaction for both the Total Score and Provider Sub-Score for each decile increase in ADI (OR 0.94; CI = 0.908-0.981; P = .003 and OR 0.94; CI = 0.91-0.98; P = .002 respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed the odds for reporting satisfaction for each decile increase in ADI were 0.96 for Total Score (CI = 0.921-0.998; P = .038) and 0.96 for Provider Sub-Score (CI = 0.92-0.993; P = .019). Patients in the most deprived quartile, compared to the least deprived, were significantly less likely to be satisfied with their care for both Total Score (OR 0.70; CI = 0.564-0.865; P = .001) and Provider Sub-Score (OR 0.69; CI = 0.558-0.852; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Increased social deprivation was an independent predictor of lower patient satisfaction in otolaryngology outpatients using the Press Ganey survey. This non-modifiable outcome should be taken into consideration when evaluating patient satisfaction scores and offers further support to the need of addressing and improving healthcare discrepancies in the field of otolaryngology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

Evaluating Factors That Influence Patient Satisfaction in Otolaryngology Clinics.

OBJECTIVES: To identify factors that influence patient satisfaction during outpatient visits in various settings of otolaryngology clinics in an academic medical center. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Academic medical center. METHODS: We reviewed Press Ganey patient satisfaction survey responses for new, outpatient visits between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2018. Self-reported race was identified using electronic medical records. Multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were used to identify continuous and categorical variables associated with patient satisfaction. RESULTS: There were 3998 unique new patient visits with completed surveys. Multivariate analysis revealed that responses for patients <18 years old are less likely to be satisfied with their care compared to patients ≥18 years old (OR 0.66; P < .001). For each 10-minute increase in wait time, patients were 43.4% less likely report satisfaction (P < .001). African American patients were also less likely to report satisfaction (OR 0.22; P = .043) while Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders were over 3 times more likely to be satisfied (OR 3.6; P = .013). Additionally, Medicare patients and those who were seen at community satellite clinics compared to the main University Hospital had increased odds of achieving satisfactory care (OR 1.3; P = .005 and OR 1.3; P = .002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Wait time, clinic location, patient race, insurance provider, and age were all shown to significantly influence patient-reported satisfaction. Understanding how these variables influence patient satisfaction will hopefully lead to processes that improve patient satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Development of Sporadic Vestibular Schwannoma.

Vestibular schwannomas (VSs) are benign, slow-growing tumors of the eighth cranial nerve. Sporadic unilateral VSs constitute approximately 95% of all newly diagnosed tumors. There is little known about risk factors for developing sporadic unilateral VS. Potential risk factors that have been reported are familial or genetic risk, noise exposure, cell phone use, and ionizing radiation, whereas protective factors may include smoking and aspirin use. More research is needed to elucidate the risk factors for development of these rare tumors.

Approach to Cochlear Implantation in Patients With Ventriculoperitoneal Shunts.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and outcomes of cochlear implantation (CI) in patients with ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts to inform clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN: Historical cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary referral centers. METHODS: A multi-institutional historical cohort of patients with VP shunts and CI was identified and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients (median age 8 years [interquratile range, IQR: 2-46]) with VP shunts and CI were identified. Of these, 41 (89%) patients had a VP shunt prior to CI. Based on institutional preference and individual patient factors, CI was performed contralateral to a pre-existing VP shunt in 24 of these 41 cases (59%) and ipsilateral in 17 (41%). Furthermore, pre-CI relocation of the VP shunt was performed in 3 cases (7%), and 2 patients (5%) underwent planned revision of their VP shunt concurrent with CI. In total, 2 of 27 pediatric patients (7%) required unanticipated revision shunt surgery, both contralateral to CI device placement, given VP shunt malfunction. One of 19 adult patients (5%) required shunt revision during CI due to shunt damage noted intraoperatively. Among 43 patients with available follow-up, 38 (88%) are regular CI users, with a median consonant-nucleus vowel-consonant word: score of 58% (IQR: 28-72). CONCLUSION: CI can be performed at low risk, either contralateral or ipsilateral, to a VP shunt, and does not mandate shunt revision in most cases. Additional considerations regarding CI receiver-stimulator placement are necessary with programmable shunts to mitigate device interaction. Preoperative planning, including coordination of care with neurosurgery, is important to achieving optimal outcomes.

Content Validity of a High-Fidelity Surgical Middle Ear Simulator: A Randomized Prospective International Multicenter Trial.

OBJECTIVE: After demonstration of face validity of a surgical middle ear simulator (SMS) previously, we assessed the content validity of the simulator with otolaryngology residents. STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter randomized prospective international study. SETTING: Four academic institutions. METHODS: Novice participants were randomized into control, low-fidelity (LF), and high-fidelity (HF) groups. Control and LF produced 2 recordings from 2 attempts, and HF produced 4 recordings from 10 attempts, with trials 1, 4, 7, and 10 used for scoring. Three blinded experts graded videos of the simulated stapedectomy operation using an objective skills assessment test format consisting of global and stapedotomy-specific scales. RESULTS: A total of 152 recordings from 61 participants were included. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. Depending on the step of the operation, inter-rater reliability ranged from 24 to 90%. For LF and HF, years of training was significantly associated with improved scores in certain objective skills assessment test subparts. HF outperformed the control group on stapes and global scores ( p < 0.05). The HF group demonstrated improvement in global score over trials, but plateaued after four trials. Scores varied greatly for participants from different institutions in certain operative steps, such as transecting incudostapedial joints, likely due to differences in instrumentation and time elapsed since manufacture. CONCLUSION: Practice with SMS led to better performance in both global and stapes-specific scores. Further studies are needed to examine construct validity and to create otology-appropriate grading systems. Variables like instrumentation and decline in flexibility of the simulator after 12 months greatly affect performance on the simulator.

Rationale for the Development of a Novel Clinical Grading Scale for Postoperative Facial Nerve Function: Results of a Multidisciplinary International Working Group.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the current study was to present the results of an international working group survey identifying perceived limitations of existing facial nerve grading scales to inform the development of a novel grading scale for assessing early postoperative facial paralysis that incorporates regional scoring and is anchored in recovery prognosis and risk of associated complications. STUDY DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: A working group of 48 multidisciplinary clinicians with expertise in skull base, cerebellopontine angle, temporal bone, or parotid gland surgery. RESULTS: House-Brackmann grade is the most widely used system to assess facial nerve function among working group members (81%), although more than half (54%) agreed that the system they currently use does not adequately estimate the risk of associated complications, such as corneal injury, and confidence in interrater and intrarater reliability is generally low. Simplicity was ranked as the most important attribute of a novel postoperative facial nerve grading system to increase the likelihood of adoption, followed by reliability and accuracy. There was widespread consensus (91%) that the eye is the most critical facial region to focus on in the early postoperative setting. CONCLUSIONS: Members were invited to submit proposed grading systems in alignment with the objectives of the working group for subsequent validation. From these data, we plan to develop a simple, clinically anchored, and reproducible staging system with regional scoring for assessing early postoperative facial nerve function after surgery of the skull base, cerebellopontine angle, temporal bone, or parotid gland.

Facial nerve outcomes after surgery for large vestibular schwannomas: do surgical approach and extent of resection matter?

OBJECT: The object of this study was to evaluate facial nerve outcomes in the surgical treatment of large vestibular schwannomas (VSs; ≥ 2.5 cm maximal or extrameatal cerebellopontine angle diameter) based on both the operative approach and extent of tumor resection. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted of English language studies on the treatment of large VSs published from 1985 to 2011. Studies were then evaluated and included if they contained data regarding the size of the tumor, surgical approach, extent of resection, and postoperative facial nerve function. RESULTS: Of the 536 studies initially screened, 59 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 30 studies were included for analysis. A total of 1688 tumor resections were reported. Surgical approach was reported in 1390 patients and was significantly associated with facial nerve outcome (ϕ= 0.29, p < 0.0001). Good facial nerve outcomes (House-Brackmann Grade I or II) were produced in 62.5% of the 555 translabyrinthine approaches, 65.2% of the 601 retrosigmoid approaches, and 27.4% of the 234 extended translabyrinthine approaches. Facial nerve outcomes from translabyrinthine and retrosigmoid approaches were not significantly different from each other, but both showed significantly more good facial nerve outcomes, compared with the extended translabyrinthine approach (OR for translabyrinthine vs extended translabyrinthine = 4.43, 95% CI 3.17-6.19, p < 0.0001; OR for retrosigmoid vs extended translabyrinthine = 4.98, 95% CI 3.57-6.95, p < 0.0001). There were 471 patients for whom extent of resection was reported. There was a strong and significant association between degree of resection and outcome (ϕ= 0.38, p < 0.0001). Of the 80 patients receiving subtotal resections, 92.5% had good facial nerve outcomes, compared with 74.6% (n = 55) and 47.3% (n = 336) of those who received near-total resections and gross-total resections, respectively. In the 2-way comparison of good versus suboptimal/poor outcomes (House-Brackmann Grade III-VI), subtotal resection was significantly better than near-total resection (OR = 4.21, 95% CI 1.50-11.79; p = 0.004), and near-total resection was significantly better than gross-total resection (OR = 3.26, 95% CI 1.71-6.20; p = 0.0002) in producing better facial nerve outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a pooled patient population from studies evaluating the treatment of large VSs, subtotal and near-total resections were shown to produce better facial nerve outcomes when compared with gross-total resections. The translabyrinthine and retrosigmoid surgical approaches are likely to result in similar rates of good facial nerve outcomes. Both of these approaches show better facial nerve outcomes when compared with the extended translabyrinthine approach, which is typically reserved for especially large tumors. The reported literature on treatment of large VSs is extremely heterogeneous and minimal consistency in reporting outcomes was observed.

Graduating Otolaryngology Residents' Ideal Practice Expectations: A Longitudinal Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Prior literature has indicated that the number of trained otolaryngologists required to meet the need of our growing population may be insufficient. Therefore, identifying trends in the subspecialty composition of future otolaryngology practices will elucidate workforce needs. STUDY DESIGN: One-page anonymous questionnaire. SETTING: The survey was completed by examinees at the conclusion of their American Board of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery oral examination from 2011 to 2019. METHODS: Data included age, gender, fellowship, practice type, and ideal future practice components. RESULTS: A total of 2286 examinees were included: 58.1% were male and 57.2% completed a fellowship. Ideal practice specialties included general otolaryngology (19%), rhinology (15%), head and neck (13%), and pediatrics (11%). General and pediatric otolaryngology had a negative correlation over time (r = -0.81, P = .01, and r = -0.75, P = .03, respectively). An overall 45% of graduates reported 1 ideal practice area (r = 0.61, P = .10), with a statistically significant decline in the number of ideal practice areas over time (r = -0.79, P = .018). Men more commonly reported allergy, head and neck, otology, rhinology, and sleep medicine as part of their ideal practice (P < .05), while women more commonly reported pediatric otolaryngology (P < .05). There was a higher mean number of ideal practice areas among men than women (2.58 vs 2.1, P < .001). CONCLUSION: There is a growing trend for more specialized otolaryngology practices. The data demonstrate a decline in considering general and pediatrics otolaryngology as part of practices, which portends a gap in access to comprehensive otolaryngology in the future.

Cognitive and behavioral effects of hearing loss.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Hearing loss is one of the largest modifiable risk factors for developing dementia, accounting for up to 9% of the overall modifiable risk. The neuropsychologic and psychosocial impacts of hearing loss are becoming increasingly appreciated. The objective of this review is to explore the recent literature regarding the cognitive and behavioral effects of hearing loss and the role of hearing rehabilitation, particularly in older adults. RECENT FINDINGS: Cognitive decline may begin while patients have subclinical hearing loss, earlier than previously thought. Hearing rehabilitation, either via hearing amplification, middle ear surgery, or cochlear implantation, likely plays a role in preventing or slowing the rate of cognitive decline in patients with hearing loss. Hearing loss can increase the likelihood of social isolation, loneliness and depression in older adults, but it is unclear at this time what effect hearing rehabilitation has on these domains. SUMMARY: Hearing loss is one of the largest modifiable risk factors for cognitive decline, and hearing rehabilitation can play a significant role in preserving cognitive function. Understanding the cognitive and psychosocial impact of hearing loss can help facilitate the development of approaches for prevention and treatment.

Frailty and Quality of Life After Cochlear Implantation in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship among frailty index, hearing measures, and hearing-related quality of life (QOL) in older recipients of cochlear implants. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Academic medical center. METHODS: Adults aged ≥65 years at the time of receiving cochlear implants between July 13, 2000, and April 3, 2019, were asked to complete a questionnaire on hearing-related QOL. Chart review was performed to identify patients' characteristics. Correlations were calculated between frailty index and audiologic outcome measures as well as between speech recognition scores and QOL scores. Linear regression models were developed to examine the impact of clinical characteristics, frailty index, and hearing measures on hearing-related QOL. RESULTS: Data for 143 respondents were included. The mean age was 80.7 years (SD, 7.1), with a mean 27.8 years of hearing loss (SD, 17.4) before implantation. The mean frailty index was 11.1 (SD, 10.6), indicating that patients had 1 or 2 of the measured comorbidities on average. No correlation was found between lower frailty index (better health) and hearing scores, including pure tone averages (PTAs) and speech recognition scores. Lower frailty index and larger improvement in PTA after cochlear implantation predicted better QOL scores on univariate analysis (respectively, P = .002, ß = -0.42 [95% CI, -0.68 to -0.16]; P = .008, ß = -0.15 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.04]) and multivariate analysis (P = .047, ß = -0.28 [95% CI, -0.55 to -0.01]; P = .006, ß = -0.16 [95% CI, -0.28 to -0.05]). No speech recognition scores correlated with QOL after cochlear implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty index does not correlate with hearing scores after cochlear implantation in older adults. Lower frailty index and more improvement in PTA predict better QOL scores after cochlear implantation in older adults.