Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:01:19.497Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cervicofacial surgery and implantable hearing device extrusion: management of challenging cases

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2021

C Carnevale ,
G Til-Pérez ,
D Arancibia-Tagle ,
M Tomás-Barberán  and
P Sarría-Echegaray
C Carnevale*
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department, Son Espases University Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
G Til-Pérez
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department, Son Espases University Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
D Arancibia-Tagle
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department, Son Espases University Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
M Tomás-Barberán
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department, Son Espases University Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
P Sarría-Echegaray
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department, Son Espases University Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Claudio Carnevale, Servicio ORL, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Carretera de Valldemossa, 79, 07210, Palma de Mallorca, Islas Baleares, Spain E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To describe our management of implantable hearing device extrusion in cases of previous cervicofacial surgery.

Methods

A review was conducted of a retrospectively acquired database of surgical procedures for implantable hearing devices performed at our department between January 2011 and December 2019. Cases of device extrusion and previous cervicofacial surgery are included. Medical and surgical management is discussed.

Results

Four cases of implant extrusion following cervicofacial surgery were identified: one involving a Bonebridge system and three involving cochlear implants. In all cases, antibiotic treatment was administered and surgical debridement performed. The same Bonebridge system was implanted in the middle fossa. The three cochlear implants were removed, and new devices were implanted in a more posterior region.

Conclusion

Previous cervicofacial surgery is a risk factor for hearing implant extrusion. The middle fossa approach is the best option for the Bonebridge system. Regarding the cochlear implant, it is always suitable to place it in a more posterior area. An inferiorly based fascio-muscular flap may be a good option to reduce the risk of extrusion.

Keywords

Hearing LossBone ConductionCochlear ImplantationPlastic SurgeryNeckBone Conduction Hearing
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 135 , Issue 3 , March 2021 , pp. 212 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

Dr C Carnevale takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

References

Zernotti, M, Sarasty, AB. Active bone conduction prosthesis: Bonebridge (TM). Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015;19:343–8Google Scholar
Zernotti, ME, Di Gregorio, MF, Galeazzi, P, Tabernero, P. Comparative outcomes of active and passive hearing devices by transcutaneous bone conduction. Acta Otolaryngol 2016;136:556–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carnevale, C, Til-Pérez, G, Arancibia-Tagle, D, Tomás-Barberán, M, Sarría-Echegaray, P. Hearing outcomes of the active bone conduction system Bonebridge® in conductive or mixed hearing loss. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2019;70:80–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geraghty, M, Fagan, P, Moisidis, E. Management of cochlear implant device extrusion; case series and literature review. J Laryngol Otol 2014;128:55–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kojima, H, Sakurai, Y, Rikitake, M, Tanaka, Y, Kawano, A, Moriyama, H. Cochlear implantation in patients with chronic otitis media. Auris Nasus Larynx 2010;37:415–21CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
El-Kashlan, HK, Arts, HA, Telian, SA. External auditory canal closure in cochlear implant surgery. Otol Neurotol 2003;24:404–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Free, RH, Falcioni, M, Di Trapani, G, Giannuzzi, AL, Russo, A, Sanna, M. The role of subtotal petrosectomy in cochlear implant surgery: a report of 32 cases and review on indications. Otol Neurotol 2013;34:1033–40CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olgun, L, Batman, C, Gultekin, G, Kandogan, T, Cerci, U. Cochlear implantation in chronic otitis media. J Laryngol Otol 2005;119:946–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bento, RF, Bittencourt, AG, Goffi-Gomez, MV, Samuel, P, Tsuji, RK, de Brito, R. Cochlear implantation via the middle fossa approach: surgical and programming considerations. Otol Neurotol 2012;33:1516–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colletti, V, Fiorino, FG, Carner, M, Sacchetto, L, Giarbini, N. New approach for cochlear implantation: cochleostomy through the middle fossa. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;123:467–74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carnevale, C, Til-Pérez, G, Arancibia-Tagle, D, Tomás-Barberán, M, Sarría-Echegaray, P. Pseudo mastoid obliteration with conchal cartilage may be a safe alternative technique for cochlear implantation in canal wall down mastoidectomy with large meatoplasty. J Laryngol Otol 2020;134:493–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sarría-Echegaray, P, Til-Pérez, G, Arancibia-Tagle, D, Carnevale, C, Tomás-Barberán, M. Implantable audiologic devices and facial plastic surgery in elderly patients. MOJ Gerontol Ger 2017;2:67–9Google Scholar
Buijs, EF, Theunisse, HJ, Mulder, JJ, van den Hoogen, FJ, Offeciers, EF, Zarowski, AJ, et al. . The use of gentamicin-impregnated collagen sponges (Garacol®/Duracoll®) in cochlear implant infections: our experience in four cases. Clin Otolaryngol 2015;40:492–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benito-González, F, Benito, J, Sánchez, LA, Estevez Alonso, S, Muñoz Herrera, A, Batuecas-Caletrio, A. Use of a gentamicin-impregnated collagen sheet (Collatamp®) in the management of major soft tissue complications in pediatric cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int 2014;15:272–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kempf, H, Johann, K, Lenarz, T. Complications in pediatric cochlear implant surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1999;256:128–32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsen, LB, Larsen, S, Wanscher, JH, Faber, CE, Jeppesen, J. Postoperative infections following cochlear implant surgery. Acta Otolaryngol 2018;138:956–60CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
David, T, Ramsden, JD, Gordon, KA, James, AL, Papsin, BC. Soft tissue complications after small incision pediatric cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope 2009;119:980–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkins, CW, Metzinger, SE, Marks, HW, Lyons, GD. Management of late extrusions of cochlear implants. Am J Otolaryngol 1998;19:768–73Google ScholarPubMed
Loochtan, MJ, Yang, S, Mantravadi, AV, Marzo, SJ. Cochlear implant extrusion secondary to keloid formation. Cochlear Implants Int 2014;15:276–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Germiller, JA, El-Kashlan, HK, Shah, UK. Chronic pseudomonas infections of cochlear implants. Otol Neurotol 2005;26:196–201CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopfenspirger, MT, Levine, SC, Rimell, FL. Infectious complications in pediatric cochlear implants. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1825–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carnevale, C, Tomás-Barberán, M, Til-Pérez, G, Sarría-Echegaray, P. The Bonebridge® active bone conduction system: a fast and safe technique for a middle fossa approach. J Laryngol Otol 2019;133:344–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krespi, YP, Ries, WR, Shugar, JM, Sisson, GA. Auricular reconstruction with postauricular myocutaneous flap. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1983;91:193–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, M, Wang, SJ, Benet, A, Meybodi, AT, Tabani, H, Ei-Sayed, IH. Posterior auricular artery as a novel anatomic landmark for identification of the facial nerve: a cadaveric study. Head Neck 2018;40:1461–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed