[Indications for middle ear obliteration within the scope of cochlear implant management].

BACKGROUND

Cochlear implants have gained worldwide acceptance as a reliable method of rehabilitation of profoundly hearing-impaired patients. Due to thorough patient selection major postoperative complications rarely occur and are flap related in most cases. Deafness can develop during chronic suppurative otitis media, either coincidentally or secondary to the medical treatment; normally this condition is regarded as a contraindication for cochlear implantation. In cases with a mastoid cavity after surgical treatment for cholesteatoma, the electrode covered only by the epithelial lining will likely become exposed or extruded. Therefore we suggest the obliteration of the middle ear cleft with abdominal fat and the blindsac closure of the external ear canal before cochlear implantation in these conditions.

PATIENTS

The average age of our 12 patients was 48 years, whereas the youngest was 2 1/2 years of age. Due to chronic inflammatory ear disease. 11 patients had a mastoid cavity on both ears. Eight patients had a cholesteatoma, the chronic bone destroying process in the temporal bone of two female patients was considered as a fibroinflammatory pseudotumor. The child had a congenital deafness in both ears with a Mondini dysplasia in CT scan. She had already developed two episodes of pneumococcal meningitis which was caused by a defect in the stapes footplate through which a liquor-filled cystic sac herniated in the middle ear. Because of a massive liquorrhoea after opening of the sac, we decided to obliterate the middle ear cleft after successful insertion of the electrode array.

RESULTS

All active electrodes of 10 Nucleus implants (Cochlear) and two Clarion devices (Advanced Bionics Corp.) were successfully inserted in the cochlea of the 12 patients. After an average follow-up of 15 months, a temporary facial palsy in one patient and an insufficient closure of a retroauricular fistula over the mastoid cavity in two cases were observed as postoperative complications. One patient with a fibroinflammatory pseudotumor developed a massive inflammatory reaction in the implanted ear two months after cochlear implantation, which could not be controlled by conservative treatment. The implant had to be removed and local conditions settled after administration of immunosuppressive treatment with cyclophosphamide. The patient received a new implant seven months ago.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of a foreign body in a potentially infected space which communicates intracranially means a surgical challenge which can be managed by obliteration of the middle ear after subtotal petrosectomy with abdominal wall fat combined with a reliable closure of the external ear canal. In case of massive inflammation we would prefer a two-stage procedure.