Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38992191›Full record

SynthesisEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2024

Cochlear implantation in patients with inner ear schwannomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis of audiological outcomes.

Francesco P Iannacone, Torsten Rahne, Elisabetta Zanoletti, Stefan K Plontke

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Hennebert's sign due to intralabyrinthine schwannoma - case report.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Francesco P IannaconeDepartment of Neuroscience DNS, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1324-9484
Torsten RahneDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medicine Halle, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, 06120, Halle (Saale), Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1859-5623
Elisabetta ZanolettiDepartment of Neuroscience DNS, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5562-5292
Stefan K PlontkeDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medicine Halle, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, 06120, Halle (Saale), Germany. stefan.plontke@uk-halle.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5424-7688

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn patients with inner ear schwannomas (IES), reports on hearing rehabilitation with cochlear implants (CI) have increased over the past decade, most of which are case reports or small case series. The aim of this study is to systematically review the reported hearing results with CI in patients with IES considering the different audiologic outcome measures used in different countries.

methodsAccording to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline, a search of published literature was conducted. We included patients with IES (primary or with secondary extension from the internal auditory canal (IAC) to the inner ear, sporadic or NF2 related) undergoing cochlear implantation with or without tumour removal. The audiological results were divided into the categories "monosyllables", "disyllables", "multisyllabic words or numbers", and "sentences".

resultsPredefined audiological outcome measures were available from 110 patients and 111 ears in 27 reports. The mean recognition scores for monosyllabic words with CI were 55% (SD: 24), for bisyllabic words 61% (SD: 36), for multisyllabic words and numbers 87% (SD: 25), and 71% (SD: 30) for sentences. Results from for multisyllabic words and numbers in general showed a tendency towards a ceiling effect. Possible risk factors for performance below average were higher complexity tumours (inner ear plus IAC/CPA), NF2, CI without tumour removal ("CI through tumour"), and sequential cochlear implantation after tumour removal (staged surgery).

conclusionHearing loss in patients with inner ear schwannomas can be successfully rehabilitated with CI with above average speech performance in most cases. Cochlear implantation thus represents a valuable option for hearing rehabilitation also in patients with IES while at the same time maintaining the possibility of MRI follow-up. Further studies should investigate possible risk factors for poor performance. Audiological tests and outcome parameters should be reported in detail and ideally be harmonized to allow better comparison between languages.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationEar, InnerNeurilemmomaCochlear ImplantsEar NeoplasmsHumansNeuroma, AcousticSpeech PerceptionTreatment OutcomeAcoustic neuromaCochlear implantInner ear schwannomaIntracochlearIntralabyrinthineNeurotologySchwannomaSkull base surgeryVestibular schwannoma

Identifiers

PMID38992191
PMCPMC11564253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.