Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T18:54:53.596Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The magnetless Clarion® cochlear implant in a patient with neurofibromatosis 2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

J. Graham*
Affiliation:
UCL Cochlear Implant Programme, Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, London
C. Lynch
Affiliation:
UCL Cochlear Implant Programme, Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, London
B. Weber
Affiliation:
Hannover Cochlear Implant Programme, Medizinische Hochschule, Hannover, Germany
L. Stollwerck
Affiliation:
UCL Cochlear Implant Programme, Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, London
J. Wei
Affiliation:
Advanced Bionics, UK
G. Brookes
Affiliation:
Neuro-otology Department, National Hospital for Neurology, Queen's Square, London, UK.
*
Address for correspondence: Mr John Graham, F.R.C.S., UCL/RNTNE Cochlear Implant Programme, Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, Grays Inn Road, London WC1X 8DA.

Abstract

We present our experience using the Clarion® magnetless multichannel cochlear implant with a woman profoundly deafened following bilateral acoustic neuromata as a consequence of neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2). The right neuroma had been previously removed without an attempt at neural preservation. On the left, however, a posterior fossa approach had been taken with the aim of preserving hearing. Although the left cochlear nerve appeared to be undamaged at the end of the operation, no hearing thresholds could be elicited on post-operative audiometry, because of damage either to the cochlear nerve or to the blood supply to the cochlea. Round window electrical stimulation subsequently produced a perception of sound, confirming that the cochlear nerve was capable of functioning and that a cochlear implant would be effective. Because she would need regular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to monitor existing and future NF2 lesions, it was decided to use a magnetless Clarion® implant, which has been shown to be MRI compatible. We report our experience of using the device in this case and discuss some of the issues related to the provision of cochlear implants to patients with NF2.

Type
Clinical Records
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arriaga, M. M. A., Marks, S. (1995) Simultaneous cochlear implantation and acoustic neuroma resection: Imaging considerations, technique, and functional outcome. Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 112: 325328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, F. O., Brackmann, D. E., Hitselberger, W. E., Purdy, J. (1995) Preservation of auditory and vestibular function after surgical removal of bilateral vestibular schwannomas in a patient with neurofibromatosis type 2. American Journal of Otology 16: 431443.Google Scholar
Cohen, N. L., Lewis, W. S., Ranshoff, J. (1993) Hearing preservation in cerebellopontine angle tumour surgery: the NYU Experience 1974–1991. American Journal of Otology 14: 423433.Google Scholar
Doyle, K. J., Shelton, C. (1993) Hearing preservation in bilateral acoustic neuroma surgery. American Journal of Otology 14: 562565.Google ScholarPubMed
Glasscock, M. E., Hays, J. W., Minor, L. B., Carrasco, V. N. (1993) Preservation of hearing surgery for acoustic neuromas. Journal of Neurosurgery 78: 864870.Google Scholar
Hoffman, R. A., Kohan, D., Cohen, N. L. (1992) Cochlear implants in the management of bilateral acoustic neuromas. American Journal of Otology 6: 525528.Google Scholar
Hulka, G. F., Bernard, E. J., Pillsbury, H. C. (1995) Cochlear implantation in a patient after removal of an acoustic neuroma. Archives of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 121: 465468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laszig, R., Sollman, W. P., Maangos, N. (1995) The restoration of hearing in neurofibromatosis type 2. Journal of Laryngology and Otology 109: 385389.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luetje, C. M., Whittaker, C. K., Geier, L., Mediavilla, S. J., Shallop, J. K. (1992) Feasibility of multi-channel human cochlear nucleus stimulation. Laryngoscope 102: 2325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pensak, M., Tew, J. M., Keith, R. W., VanLoveren, H. R. (1991) Management of the acoustic neuroma in an only hearing ear. Skull Base Surgery 1: 9396.Google Scholar
Sanna, M., Karmarkar, S., Landolfi, M. (1995) Hearing preservation in vestibular schwannoma surgery: fact or fantasy? Journal of Laryngology and Otology 109: 374380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shannon, R. V., Fayad, J., Moore, J., Lo, W. M. M., Otto, S., Nelson, R. A., O'Leary, M. (1993) Auditory brainstem implant: 2 Postsurgical issues and performance. Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery 108: 634642.Google Scholar
Tono, T., Ushisako, Y., Morimitsu, T. (1996) Cochlear implantation in an intralabyrinthine acoustic neuroma patient after resection of an intracanalicular tumour. Journal of Laryngology and Otology 110: 570573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, B. P., Goldring, J. E., Santogrossi, , Tziviskos, B., Koestler, H., Battmer, R., Lenarz, Th. (1998) MRI Compatibility Testing of the Clarion 1.2 Cochlear Implant. American Journal of Otology 19: 585590.Google ScholarPubMed
Weber, B. P., Neuberger, M. D., Goldring, J. E., Santogrossi, T., Koestler, H., Battmer, R., Lenarz, Th. (1999) Clinical results of the Clarion Magnetless Cochlear Implant. To be published in May 1999. (Suppl) of Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology.Google Scholar