Round Window Reinforcement Research Articles

The impact of round window reinforcement on middle and inner ear mechanics with air and bone conduction stimulation

The round window (RW) membrane plays an important role in normal inner ear mechanics. Occlusion or reinforcement of the RW has been described in the context of congenital anomalies or after cochlear implantation and is applied as a surgical treatment for hyperacusis. Multiple lumped and finite element models predict a low-frequency hearing loss with air conduction of up to 20 dB after RW reinforcement and limited to no effect on hearing with bone conduction stimulation. Experimental verification of these results, however, remains limited.Here, we present an experimental study measuring the impact of RW reinforcement on the middle and inner ear mechanics with air and bone conduction stimulation. In a within-specimen repeated measures design with human cadaveric specimens (n = 6), we compared the intracochlear pressures in scala vestibuli (PSV) and scala tympani (PST) before and after RW reinforcement with soft tissue, cartilage, and bone cement. The differential pressure (PDIFF) across the basilar membrane – known to be closely related to the hearing sensation - was calculated as the complex difference between PSV and PST.With air conduction stimulation, both PSV and PSTincreased on average up to 22 dB at frequencies below 1500 Hz with larger effect sizes for PST compared to PSV. The PDIFF, in contrast, decreased up to 11 dB at frequencies between 700 and 800 Hz after reinforcement with bone cement.With bone conduction, the average within-specimen effects were less than 5 dB for either PSV, PST, or PDIFF. The inter-specimen variability with bone conduction, however, was considerably larger than with air conduction.This experimental study shows that RW reinforcement impacts air conduction stimulation at low frequencies. Bone conduction stimulation seems to be largely unaffected. From a clinical point of view, these results support the hypothesis that delayed loss of air conduction hearing after cochlear implantation could be partially explained by the impact of RW reinforcement.

Superior semicircular canal dehiscence in relation with the superior petrosal sinus: our experience, surgical management and systematic review of literature.

Most of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence (SSCD) are located in the apical region of the SSC. However, in a small number of cases, it may be situated in the medial wall, causing the SSC to contact with the superior petrosal sinus (SPS). The aim of this study is to describe four patients with SSCD involving the superior petrosal sinus (SSCD-SPS) and to perform a review of the literature. Observational retrospective study of patients diagnosed of SSCD-SPS in a tertiary referral center. A systematic review was made, identifying 7 articles in the literature. Clinical presentation, complementary test (pure-tone audiometry, PTA; vestibular evoked myogenic potential, VEMP; computed tomography, CT), therapeutic management and outcomes were reported. Four new cases of SSCD-SPS are reported, in three of them a transmastoid plugging was performed. 54 patients with SSCD-SPS (57 dehiscences) were reported in the literature. The most frequent symptoms were aural pressure (57.41%) and vertigo provoked by pressure/Valsalva (55.55%). Conductive hearing loss was the most common finding in PTA (47.37%). Abnormally low thresholds were observed in 59.46% of reported VEMP. Transmastoid approach was used in ten cases, middle fossa approach in four, round window reinforcement in one, and occlusion of the SPS using coils in two. Within SSCD, we have encountered a rare subtype characterized by its medial wall location in close proximity to the SPS. This subgroup needs special consideration as it has shown its own distinct characteristics. Regarding therapeutic management, we advocate a transmastoid approach.

Oval and round window reinforcement surgery leads to improvements in sound tolerance and quality of life for hyperacusis patients

PurposeHyperacusis is an audiological disorder in which patients become persistently sensitive and intolerant to everyday environmental sounds. For those patients that fail conservative options, a minimally invasive surgical procedure has been developed. Materials & methodsRetrospective case series of 73 adult patients with hyperacusis who underwent oval and round window reinforcement surgery between 1/2017–6/2023. Small pieces of temporalis fascia were used to reinforce the round and oval windows. Patients were separated into two groups based on their preoperative speech Loudness Discomfort Level (LDL). Patients with a preoperative speech LDL ≤ 70 dB were placed in the “low LDL group” whereas patients with a preoperative speech LDL >70 dB were placed in the “high LDL group.” Preoperative and one-week postoperative audiogram and speech LDLs were compared. Quality of life was assessed using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) survey. Results73 patients met inclusion criteria - 21 patients in the low LDL group and 52 in the high LDL group. Patients in the high LDL group significantly improved their LDLs by an average of 3.5 dB (P < 0.0001). 42 patients (80.8 %) in the high LDL group had improvement and would recommend the surgery for hyperacusis. Patients in the low LDL group significantly improved their LDL by an average of 12.9 dB (P = 0.032). Ten patients (47.6 %) from the low LDL group experienced improvement and would recommend hyperacusis surgery. ConclusionMany patients with hyperacusis who undergo oval and round window reinforcement can receive significant improvement in sound tolerance and quality of life. Patients with a pre-op speech LDL > 70 dB have the greatest potential for improvement with surgery (80.8 %), probably because their hyperacusis was less severe. In the high LDL group(>70dB) the improvement in 1-10 scale went from 8.6 pre-op to 2.4 post op. In the low LDL group(<70dB) went from 9.2 pre-op to 6.8 post-op. These findings were consistent with the GBI results.

Practicality of multilayer round window reinforcement in the surgical management of superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome: a case report of long-term follow-up.

Several surgical techniques have been documented for approaching and repairing superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS). These techniques encompass the trans-middle cranial fossa, transmastoid, endoscopic approaches, and round window reinforcement (RWR). RWR entails the placement of connective tissue with or without cartilage and around the round window niche, restricting the round window's movement to minimize the 3rd window effect and restore the bony labyrinth closer to its normal state. We employed the multilayer RWR technique, resulting in significant postoperative improvement and long-lasting effects for 3.7 years in 2 cases. Here, we present the clinical findings, surgical procedures, and the effectiveness of multilayer RWR. This technique can be the initial choice for surgical treatments of SCDS due to its high effectiveness, longer-lasting effect, and minimal risk of surgical complications.

Long-Term Outcomes of Round Window Reinforcement for Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence Syndrome.

To report long-term patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after standardized round window rein-forcement (RWR) with thin cartilage and perichondrium for superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome (SSCDS). Cross-sectional survey in 2020 and retrospective longitudinal study of outcomes at 3 months, 1 year, and last follow-up after 28 consecutive RWRs. Endpoints were the last follow-up for PROMs and 1 year postoperatively for audiometry and cVEMP. At the last follow-up (mean 2.4 years postoperatively), improvement was reported for 19/28 ears (68%) in symptoms overall; for 17/27 ears (63%) in auditory symptoms, and for 12/24 (50%) in vestibular symptoms. Nine ears (32%) required further surgery. No major complications occurred. On the group level, postoperative improvement at 3 months declined significantly for auditory and vestibular symptoms over time, and stayed stable beyond 1 year. Improved ears had on average 2.9 years follow-up. Improvement correlated significantly with SSCD length, and was associated with contralateral dehiscence. Thirteen ears (46%) had another potential cause of vestibular symptoms. This group showed significantly less improvement. Audiometric test results did not predict PROMs. Since long-term outcomes do not compare with those reported for plugging and repair, RWR is not suggested as a first line intervention for SSCDS. Considering the stable rates of improvement on average 2.9 years postoperatively and the absence of major complications, RWR may be an alternative to plugging or repair in fragile patients who do not accept the risk of complications with more invasive surgery, and who accept that results may deteriorate over time.

Surgical treatments of superior semicircular canal dehiscence: A single-centre experience in 63 cases.

abstractObjectiveDifferent procedures have been described to treat superior canal dehiscence. The present study aims to describe the results obtained with middle fossa approach, transmastoid approach, and round window reinforcement in a large series of patients.Methods and DesignIn this single‐center retrospective study, we report the results of the procedures performed between 2006 and 2019 using the three main surgical approaches, middle fossa approach (MFA), transmastoid approach (TMA), and round window reinforcement (RWR). The outcome on cardinal cochlear and vestibular symptoms, audiometric results, and changes in cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMPs) were analyzed. The patients were also interviewed 12 months to 13 years post‐treatment to establish their overall satisfaction following surgery.ResultsSixty‐three patients were divided into three groups: 42 MFA; 12 RWR; 9 TMA. Postsurgical control rates exceeded 80% for the majority of symptoms in the MFA and TMA groups, and ranged from 11.1% to 83.3% for the RWR group. Over 90% of MFA or TMA patients and 60% of the RWR cohort were satisfied overall with their treatment. Hearing thresholds were intact following surgery in the MFA and TMA groups. There was one case of profound postoperative deafness in the RWR group.ConclusionMFA and TMA are both safe and effective techniques in the treatment of disabling SSCD. Since MFA is the more invasive technique, we suggest that TMA should be proposed as first‐line treatment, temporal bone anatomy permitting. RWR outcomes are more variable in term of symptomatic control, and this option could be offered to patients at risk under general anesthesia. level of evidenceLevel 4 evidence.

Audiologic Outcomes After Oval and Round Window Reinforcement Surgery.

Oval window (OW) and round window (RW) reinforcement surgery has been used for symptomatic treatment of multiple clinical entities, most commonly perilymphatic fistula and superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Owing to the theoretical acoustically negative effect of stiffening the windows, there has been concern of an unfavorable effect on audiologic outcomes due to the procedure. The purpose of this study is to specifically evaluate audiologic outcomes after OW and RW reinforcement. A retrospective review of patients undergoing transcanal OW or RW reinforcement was completed. Patients were evaluated both as a total group and as two groups separated into "third window" and "two-window" groups based on their specific diagnosis. Primary outcomes included changes in individual pure-tone thresholds, pure-tone average (PTA), air-bone gap, speech reception threshold (SRT), and word recognition scores (WRS) between the preoperative and postoperative groups. Seventy-one patients were included in the study. The combined cohort demonstrated a significant postoperative 2.75 dB increase in the air conduction hearing level at 4000 Hz (p < 0.05). This was almost entirely accounted for by a 2.18 dB increase in the air-bone gap at this frequency (p < 0.05). There were no significant changes in PTA, SRT, or WRS between in the combined group or in the subgroup analysis. OW and RW tissue reinforcement resulted in a statistically significant but likely clinically insignificant decrease in hearing at the 4000 Hz frequency. There was no worsening of PTA, WRS, or SRT.

Third Window Syndrome: Surgical Management of Cochlea-Facial Nerve Dehiscence.

Objective: This communication is the first assessment of outcomes after surgical repair of cochlea-facial nerve dehiscence (CFD) in a series of patients. Pre- and post-operative quantitative measurement of validated survey instruments, symptoms, diagnostic findings and anonymous video descriptions of symptoms in a cohort of 16 patients with CFD and third window syndrome (TWS) symptoms were systematically studied.Study design: Observational analytic case-control study.Setting: Quaternary referral center.Patients: Group 1 had 8 patients (5 children and 3 adults) with CFD and TWS who underwent surgical management using a previously described round window reinforcement technique. Group 2 had 8 patients (2 children and 6 adults) with CFD who did not have surgical intervention.Interventions: The Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) were administered pre-operatively and post-operatively. In addition, diagnostic findings of comprehensive audiometry, cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP) thresholds and electrocochleography (ECoG) were studied. Symptoms before and after surgical intervention were compared.Main outcome measures: Pre- vs. post-operative DHI, HIT-6, and audiometric data were compared statistically. The thresholds and amplitudes for cVEMP in symptomatic ears, ears with cochlea-facial nerve dehiscence and ears without CFD were compared statistically.Results: There was a highly significant improvement in DHI and HIT-6 at pre- vs. post-operative (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.001, respectively). The age range was 12.8–52.9 years at the time of surgery (mean = 24.7 years). There were 6 females and 2 males. All 8 had a history of trauma before the onset of their symptoms. The mean cVEMP threshold was 75 dB nHL (SD 3.8) for the operated ear and 85.7 dB (SD 10.6) for the unoperated ear. In contrast to superior semicircular canal dehiscence, where most ears have abnormal ECoG findings suggestive of endolymphatic hydrops, only 1 of 8 operated CFD ears (1 of 16 ears) had an abnormal ECoG study.Conclusions: Overall there was a marked improvement in DHI, HIT-6 and symptoms post-operatively. Statistically significant reduction in cVEMP thresholds was observed in patients with radiographic evidence of CFD. Surgical management with round window reinforcement in patients with CFD was associated with improved symptoms and outcomes measures.

Two cases of Tullio phenomenon in which oval and round window reinforcement surgery was effective

AimTo report the effect of oval and round window reinforcement surgery performed in two patients with the Tullio phenomenon. Case 1: A male with bilateral superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Downbeat nystagmus with leftward horizontal eye movement was recorded in an electronystagmogram using a pure-tone sound of 110dB at 2000 or 4000Hz in the right ear. Case 2: A female who had undergone stapes surgery. Computed tomography revealed an ossicular prosthesis in the vestibule. An audiogram indicated mild to moderate hearing impairment in the right ear. Leftward horizontal nystagmus was recorded in an electronystagmogram using a pure-tone sound of 110dB at 500 or 1000Hz in the right ear. Surgical findings indicated that the prosthesis was inserted deep into the oval window, which was closed with thin connective tissue. OutcomesAfter oval and round window reinforcement surgery was performed in the right ear, and loud, pure-tone sounds elicited neither nystagmus nor dizziness in either patient.

Stapes hypermobility as a possible cause of hyperacusis.

Hyperacusis is a reduction of normal tolerances for everyday sounds. Although several publications have been produced demonstrating that minimally invasive surgical procedures may improve patient symptoms, the precise etiology of hyperacusis often remains elusive. This study describes 21 patients, 7 of whom stapes hypermobility is believed to be a mechanical genesis of their hyperacusis symptoms. A prospective, repeated-measure single-arm design was used for this study. All patients were evaluated and treated at a tertiary level otologic referral center. 21 patients (Cohort A) with severe hyperacusis underwent oval and round window reinforcement. Seven patients (Cohort B) intraoperatively appeared to have subjective hypermobility of the stapes. Additional reinforcement of the stapes superstructure was performed in these patients. In Cohort A, loudness discomfort level (LDL) values improved on average from 72.7 dB to 81.9 dB. Hyperacusis questionnaire (HQ) scores improved from 30.1 to 14.7. Numeric Rating Scale scores (0-10) decreased from 8.5 to 4.0. In Cohort B, values similarly improved from an average of 72.4 dB to 88.2 dB. HQ scores improved from 35.8 to 18.9. Numeric Rating Scale scores fell from 10.0 to 3.7. Postoperatively there were no complaints of hearing loss. Sixteen out of 21(76%) reported improved quality of life and diminished symptoms of hyperacusis. It is possible that patients suffering from hyperacusis may have a mechanical cause for their symptoms. Further research is necessary to clarify stapes mobility in patients with these symptoms. Excess temporalis tissue reinforcement of the stapes along with round window reinforcement shows promise as a minimally invasive surgical option for patients suffering from hyperacusis.

Surgical treatments for a case of superior canal dehiscence syndrome associated with patulous Eustachian tube

ObjectivesThe patulous Eustachian tube (PET) and superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS) have similarity in their symptoms and similar effects caused by positional changes, causing difficulty in the differentiation between the two disorders. This report describes a case of both SCDS and PET that was eventually successfully treated. MethodsA 68-year-old man presented with hyperacusis to his own footsteps and gait disturbance. He had been diagnosed as PET two years before and had been treated by insertion of a silicone plug (Kobayashi plug) at the other hospital. Clinical case records, audiological data, cervical vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (cVEMP), Eustachian tube function tests and computed tomography (CT) were taken in the sitting position. ResultsWhile the CT confirmed superior semicircular canal dehiscence, the results of cVEMP was not typical of SCD likely due to preexisting hearing impairment in the right ear with a history of middle ear surgeries for the treatment of PET. He received round window reinforcement (RWR) and achieved relief from his symptoms but six months after the surgery, he visited again with complaints of autophony of his own voice and breathing. The tympanic membrane was found to move synchronous with respiration, and Eustachian tube function tests and the sitting CT confirmed the recurrence of severe PET. He had his silicone plug exchanged (increase in size of the Kobayashi plug) and achieved relief from symptoms. ConclusionsThe present case was a rare instance showing that PET and SCDS can occur simultaneously in a patient. The patient achieved relief from symptoms after treatment with RWR and insertion of the Kobayashi plug.

Heterogeneity in Reported Outcome Measures after Surgery in Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome-A Systematic Literature Review.

Superior canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS) can be treated surgically in patients with incapacitating symptoms. However, the ideal treatment has not been determined. This systematic literature review aims to assess available evidence on the comparative effectiveness and risks of different surgical treatments regarding: (1) symptom improvement; (2) objectively measurable auditory and vestibular function; (3) adverse effects, and (4) length of hospitalization. A systematic database search according to PRISMA statement was conducted on Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library. In addition, reference lists were searched. No correspondence with the authors was established. The last search was conducted on June 9, 2017. Retrospective and prospective cohort studies were held applicable under the condition that they investigated the association between a surgical treatment method and the relief of vestibular and/or auditory symptoms. Only studies including quantitative assessment of the pre- to postoperative success rate of a surgical treatment method were included. Case reports, reviews, meta-analysis, and studies not published in English, Dutch, or German were excluded. The first author searched literature and extracted data; the first and last analyzed the data. Seventeen studies (354 participants, 367 dehiscences) met the eligibility criteria and were grouped according to surgical approach. Seven combinations of surgical approaches and methods for addressing the dehiscence were identified: plugging, resurfacing, or a combination of both through the middle fossa (middle fossa approach); plugging, resurfacing, or a combination of both through the mastoid (transmastoid approach); round window reinforcement through the ear canal (transcanal approach). Several studies showed high internal validity, but quality was often downgraded due to study design (1). Outcome measures and timing of postsurgical assessment varied among studies, making it unfeasible to pool data to perform a meta-analysis. A standardized protocol including outcome measures and timeframes is needed to compare the effectiveness and safety SCDS treatments. It should include symptom severity assessments and changes in vestibular and auditory function before and after treatment.

Effect of Round Window Reinforcement on Hearing: A Temporal Bone Study With Clinical Implications for Surgical Reinforcement of the Round Window.

Round window reinforcement leads to conductive hearing loss. The round window is stiffened surgically as therapy for various conditions, including perilymphatic fistula and superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Round window reinforcement reduces symptoms in these patients. However, it also reduces fluid displacement in the cochlea and might therefore increase conductive hearing loss. Perichondrium was applied to the round window membrane in nine fresh-frozen, nonpathologic temporal bones. In four temporal bones cartilage was applied subsequently. Acoustic stimuli in the form of frequency sweeps from 250 to 8000 Hz were generated at 110 dB sound pressure level. A total of 16 frequencies in a 1/3-octave series were used. Stapes velocities in response to the acoustic stimuli were measured at equally spaced multiple points covering the stapes footplate using a scanning laser Doppler interferometry system. Measurements were made at baseline, after applying perichondrium, and after applying cartilage. At frequencies up to 1000 Hz perichondrium reinforcement decreased stapes velocities by 1.5 to 2.9 dB compared with no reinforcement (p value = 0.003). Reinforcement with cartilage led to a further deterioration of stapes velocities by 2.6 to 4.2 dB at frequencies up to 1000 Hz (p value = 0.050). The higher frequencies were not affected by perichondrium reinforcement (p value = 0.774) or cartilage reinforcement (p value = 0.644). Our results seem to suggest a modest, clinically negligible effect of reinforcement with perichondrium. Placing cartilage on the round window resulted in a graded effect on stapes velocities in keeping with the increased stiffness of cartilage compared with perichondrium. Even so, the effect was relatively small.

Longitudinal Cognitive and Neurobehavioral Functional Outcomes Before and After Repairing Otic Capsule Dehiscence.

Objective:Patients with peripheral vestibular dysfunction because of gravitational receptor asymmetries display signs of cognitive dysfunction and are assumed to have neurobehavioral sequelae. This was tested with pre- and postoperatively quantitative measurements in three cohort groups with superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome (SSCDS) symptoms with: 1) superior canal dehiscence (SCD) repaired via a middle cranial fossa craniotomy and canal plugging only; 2) otic capsule defects not visualized with imaging (no-iOCD) repaired with round window reinforcement (RWR) only; or 3) both SCD plugging and subsequent development of no-iOCD followed by RWR.Study Design:Prospective patient series.Setting:Tertiary referral center.Patients:There were 13 adult and 4 pediatric patients with SSCDS who had completion of neuropsychology test batteries pre- and every 3 months postoperatively. Eight patients had no-iOCD and RWR exclusively, 5 had SCD and plugging exclusively, and 4 had both SCD plugging and then development of no-iOCD with RWR. These cohorts included SSCDS with 2 different dehiscence locations.Interventions:Completion of a neuropsychology test battery preoperatively and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postoperatively that included: Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI); Wide Range Intelligence Test (WRIT FSIQ) including average verbal (crystallized intelligence) and visual (fluid intelligence); Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning (WRAML), including the four domains of verbal memory, visual memory, attention/concentration, and working memory; and Delis–Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS). The Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) were also completed to assess the impact of their disease on activities pre- and postoperatively.Main Outcome Measures:Quantitative and statistical analysis of their cognitive and neurobehavioral function.Results:The pattern of differences between the SCD group and the no-iOCD group from WRAML verbal, visual, and attention test performance indicate different postoperative clinical trajectories. For the WRAML, there was a statistically significant improvement for visual memory and verbal memory for the no-iOCD only and both (SCD and subsequent no-iOCD) groups, but no mean improvement for the SCD only group. By contrast, the no-iOCD group had significantly lower scores on the WRAML attention test preoperatively, but they recovered postoperatively to match the other groups. The preoperative findings and postoperative outcomes did not differ significantly among patient groups on the WRAML working memory test, D-KEFS motor scores, D-KEFS number and letter scores, or Wide Range Intelligence Test scores. There was a significant decrease in the BDI for all groups. The IQ scores were unchanged. There was a statistically significant improvement in the DHI and HIT-6 scores postoperatively in all groups.Conclusions:There was a marked overall improvement in cognitive and neurobehavioral function postoperatively. Variability may result from duration of underlying disease before intervention. The initial decrement or delay in performance improvement measured in several patients may represent brain reorganization. Greater longitudinal data and greater subject numbers are necessary to better understand and optimize cognitive recovery.

Otic capsule dehiscence syndrome: Superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome with no radiographically visible dehiscence.

We conducted a prospective longitudinal study of two cohorts of patients who had superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome (SSCDS); one group had radiographically confirmed superior canal dehiscence (SCD), and the other exhibited no identified otic capsule dehiscence on imaging (no-iOCD). We compiled data obtained from prospective structured symptomatology interviews; diagnostic studies; three-dimensional, high-resolution, temporal bone computed tomography; and a retrospective case review from our tertiary care referral center. Eleven adults and 1 child with SSCDS were identified, surgically managed, and followed. Six of these patients-1 man and 5 women, aged 29 to 54 years at first surgery (mean: 41.8)-had radiologically confirmed SCD. The other 6 patients-1 man, 4 women, and 1 girl, aged 1 to 51 years (mean: 32.2)-had no-iOCD. The 6 adults with SCD underwent surgery via a middle cranial fossa approach with plugging procedures. The 5 adults and 1 child with no-iOCD underwent round window reinforcement (RWR) surgery. One SCD patient developed no-iOCD 1.5 years after SCD surgery, and she subsequently underwent RWR surgery. Our main outcome measures were patient symptomatology (with video documentation) and the results of diagnostic studies. Other than the character of migraine headaches, there was no difference in preoperative symptomatology between the two groups. Postoperatively, resolution of SSCDS symptoms ultimately occurred in all patients. Both the SCD and the no-iOCD groups experienced a highly significant improvement in postural control following treatment (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p < 0.001). We conclude that the term otic capsule dehiscence syndrome more accurately reflects the clinical syndrome of SSCDS since it includes both superior semicircular canal dehiscence and no-iOCD, as well as posterior and lateral semicircular canal dehiscence, all of which can manifest as SSCDS. We have also included links to videos in which 4 of the SSCDS patients with no-iOCD in this study discussed their symptoms and the results of their surgery; these links are found in the "References" section in citations 12-15. Links to three other videos of interest are contained in citations 10, 11, and 24.

Round and oval window reinforcement for the treatment of hyperacusis

PurposeTo present the outcomes of two patients (three ears) with hyperacusis treated with round and oval window reinforcement. Materials and methodsTranscanal placement of temporalis fascia on the round window membrane and stapes footplate was performed. Loudness discomfort level testing was performed. Results of pre and post-operative hyperacusis questionnaires and audiometric testing were reviewed. ResultsTwo patients (three ears) underwent surgery. Results from the hyperacusis questionnaire improved by 21 and 13 points, respectively. Except for a mild loss in the high frequencies, no change in hearing was noted post-operatively. Both patients reported no negative effects from surgery, marked improvement in ability to tolerate noise, and would recommend the procedure to others. There were no complications. ConclusionsRound and oval window reinforcement is a minimally invasive option for treating hyperacusis when usual medical therapies fail. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the procedure in reducing noise intolerance.

Round window reinforcement for superior semicircular canal dehiscence: A retrospective multi-center case series

PurposeTo evaluate the outcome of round window (RW) tissue reinforcement in the management of superior semicircular canal dehiscence (SSCD). Materials and methodsTwenty-two patients with confirmed diagnosis of SSCD by clinical presentation, imaging, and/or testing were included in the study. Six surgeons at four institutions conducted a multicenter chart review of patients treated for symptomatic superior canal dehiscence using RW tissue reinforcement or complete RW occlusion. A transcanal approach was used to reinforce the RW with various types of tissue. Patients completed a novel postoperative survey, grading preoperative and postoperative symptom severity. ResultsAnalysis revealed statistically significant improvement in all symptoms with the exception of hearing loss in 19 patients who underwent RW reinforcement. In contrast, 2 of 3 participants who underwent the alternate treatment of RW niche occlusion experienced worsened symptoms requiring revision surgery. ConclusionRW tissue reinforcement may reduce the symptoms associated with SSCD. The reinforcement technique may benefit SSCD patients by reducing the “third window” effect created by a dehiscent semicircular canal. Given its low risks compared to middle cranial fossa or transmastoid canal occlusion, RW reinforcement may prove to be a suitable initial procedure for intractable SSCD. In contrast, complete RW occlusion is not advised.

Round Window Reinforcement for Superior Canal Dehiscence

Objective: To evaluate the outcome of round window (RW) with or without oval window (OW) tissue reinforcement in the management of superior canal dehiscence (SCD). Method: Chart reviews were perfomed for patients with symptomatic SCD that underwent this window reinforcement procedure. Preoperative and postoperative audiometry, vestibular myogenic evoked potentials (VEMP), and presence of a positive Tullio and Hennebert’s sign were recorded. Patient questionnaires were administered to assess symptomatic relief following the procedure. Results: Twenty-five chart reviews from 5 tertiary centers revealed that most patients experienced reduction of symptoms and were satisfied with the results. A comprehensive analysis will be presented. Conclusion: Tissue reinforcement of the windows(s) may reduce some of the symptoms associated with SCD, perhaps by mitigating some of the presumed “third window” effect of the dehiscence. Most patients were grateful for the benefits provided by the procedure and the avoidance of a craniotomy or mastoidectomy.