Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:23:13.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Endolymphatic sac drainage for the treatment of Ménière's disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2016

R F Bento ,
J C Cisneros  and
A C De Oliveira Fonseca
R F Bento
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Hospital das Clínicas, University of São Paulo, Brazil
J C Cisneros*
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Hospital das Clínicas, University of São Paulo, Brazil
A C De Oliveira Fonseca
Affiliation:
Otorhinolaryngology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Hospital das Clínicas, University of São Paulo, Brazil
*
Address for correspondence: Dr Juan Carlos Cisneros Lesser, Otorhinolaryngology Department, Hospital das Clínicas, University of São Paulo Faculty of Medicine, Room 6167, 6th floor, Av. Dr. Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255, São Paulo, Brazil, 05403-000 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To describe the results obtained with endolymphatic sac drainage in patients with Ménière's disease.

Method:

A retrospective case review study was conducted of 95 Ménière's disease patients who underwent endolymphatic sac drainage in a tertiary care referral centre, after failing a long course of medical management. The main outcome measures were vertigo control and hearing preservation.

Results:

In patients with unilateral disease, vertigo control was obtained in 94.3 per cent of patients. A significant improvement in cochlear function was seen in 14 per cent of patients, and hearing was preserved or improved in 88 per cent. For the bilateral group, vertigo control was obtained in 85.7 per cent of patients and cochlear function improved in 28 per cent. Hearing preservation was attained in 71 per cent of these patients.

Conclusion:

Endolymphatic sac drainage is a good surgical option for patients with incapacitating endolymphatic hydrops, providing a high percentage of vertigo control and hearing preservation.

Keywords

Endolymphatic ShuntEndolymphatic SacEndolymphatic DuctMeniere DiseaseEndolymphatic Hydrops
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 131 , Issue 2 , February 2017 , pp. 144 - 149
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2016 

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

1 Portmann, G. Vertigo: surgical treatment by opening of the saccus endolymphaticus. Arch Otolaryngol 1927;6:309–19Google Scholar
2 Hallpike, CS, Cairns, H. Observations on the pathology of Ménière's syndrome. J Laryngol Otol 1938;53:624– 54 Google Scholar
3 House, WF. Subarachnoid shunt for drainage of endolymphatic hydrops. A preliminary report. Laryngoscope 1962;72:713–29CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4 Kimura, RS. Experimental blockage of the endolymphatic duct and sac and its effects on the inner ear of the guinea pig. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1967;76:4664–87Google Scholar
5 Paparella, MM, Hanson, DG. Endolymphatic sac drainage for intractable vertigo (method and experiences). Laryngoscope 1976;86:697–703 Google Scholar
6 Paparella, MM, Goycoolea, M. Panel of Ménière's disease. Endolymphatic sac enhancement surgery for Ménière's disease: an extension of conservative therapy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1981;90:610–15Google Scholar
7 Brown, JS. A ten year statistical follow-up of 245 consecutive cases of endolymphatic shunt and decompression with 328 consecutive cases of labyrinthectomy. Laryngoscope 1983;93:1419–24Google Scholar
8 Brinson, GM, Chen, DA, Arriaga, MA. Endolymphatic mastoid shunt versus endolymphatic sac decompression for Ménière's disease. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007;136:415–21Google Scholar
9 Thomsen, J, Bretlau, P, Tos, M, Johnsen, NJ. Endolymphatic sac mastoid shunt surgery. A nonspecific treatment modality? Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1986;95:32–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10 Bretlau, P, Thomsen, J, Tos, M, Johnsen, NJ. Placebo effect in surgery for Ménière's disease: nine-year follow-up. Am J Otol 1989;10:259–61Google Scholar
11 Sood, AJ, Lambert, PR, Nguyen, SA, Meyer, TA. Endolymphatic sac surgery for Ménière's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2014;35:1033–45Google Scholar
12 Saliba, I, Gabra, N, Alzahrani, M, Berbiche, D. Endolymphatic duct blockage: a randomized controlled trial of a novel surgical technique for Ménière's disease treatment. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015;152:122–9Google Scholar
13 Gabra, N, Asmar, MH, Berbiche, D, Saliba, I. Endolymphatic duct blockage: quality of life assessment of a novel surgical technique for Ménière disease. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016;273:2965–73Google Scholar
14 Paparella, MM, Sajjadi, H. Endolymphatic sac enhancement. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1994;27:381–402 Google Scholar
15 American Academy of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Foundation. Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium guidelines for the diagnosis and evaluation of therapy in Ménière's disease. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1995;113:181–5Google Scholar
16 Chia, SH, Gamst, AC, Anderson, JP, Harris, JP. Intra-tympanic gentamicin therapy for Ménière's disease: a meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2004;25:544–52Google Scholar
17 Silverstein, H, Smouha, E, Jones, R. Natural history vs. surgery for Ménière's disease. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989;100:6–16 Google Scholar
18 Kitahara, T, Kubo, T, Okumura, S, Kitahara, M. Effects of endolymphatic sac drainage with steroids for intractable Meniere's disease: a long-term follow-up and randomized controlled study. Laryngoscope 2008;118:854–61Google Scholar
19 Huang, TS. Endolymphatic sac surgery for Meniere's disease: experience with over 3000 cases. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2002;35:591–606 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20 Paparella, MM. Revision of endolymphatic sac surgery for recurrent Ménière's disease. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2002;35:607–19Google Scholar