Premium
Cochlear Reimplantation: Surgical Techniques and Functional Results
Author(s) -
Alexiades George,
Roland J. Thomas,
Fishman Andrew J.,
Shapiro William,
Waltzman Susan B.,
Cohen Noel L.
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
the laryngoscope
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.181
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1531-4995
pISSN - 0023-852X
DOI - 10.1097/00005537-200109000-00022
Subject(s) - medicine , cochlear implantation , surgery , implant , cochlear implant , replantation , audiology
Objectives/Hypothesis The most common indication for cochlear reimplantation is device failure. Other, less frequent indications consist of “upgrades” (e.g., single to multichannel), infection, and flap breakdown. Although the percentage of failures has decreased over time, an occasional patient requires reimplantation because of device malfunction. The varying designs of internal receiver/stimulators and electrode arrays mandate an examination of the nature and effects of reimplantation for the individual designs. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the reimplantation of several implant designs and to determine whether differences in surgical technique, anatomical findings, and postoperative performance exist. Study Design Retrospective chart review. Methods The subjects were 33 of 618 severely to profoundly deaf adults and children who had implantation at the New York University Medical Center (New York, NY) between February 1984 and December 2000. The subjects had previously had implantation with either a single‐channel 3M/House (House Ear Institute, Los Angeles, CA) or 3M/Vienna (Technical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria) device or with one of the multichannel Clarion (Advanced Bionics, Sylmar, CA), Ineraid (Smith & Nephew Richards, TN), or Nucleus (including the Contour) devices (Cochlear Corp., Englewood, CO) before reimplantation. Results Length of use before reimplantation ranged from 1 month to 13 years and included traumatic and atraumatic (electronic) failures, as well as device extrusion or infection. Results indicated that postoperative performance was either equal to or better than scores before failure. None of the devices explanted caused damage that precluded the implantation of the same or an upgraded device. These findings support the efficacy and safety of internal implant designs as related to the maintenance of a functional cochlea for the purpose of reimplantation. Conclusions Cochlear reimplantation can be performed safely and without decrement to performance. The number of implanted electrodes at reinsertion were either the same or greater in all cases.