What Did We Learn from Our Cochlear Implant Revisions?

Q3 Medicine
Cigdem Kalaycik Ertugay, Ozgur Yigit, Ecem Sevim Akı
{"title":"What Did We Learn from Our Cochlear Implant Revisions?","authors":"Cigdem Kalaycik Ertugay, Ozgur Yigit, Ecem Sevim Akı","doi":"10.22038/ijorl.2025.77740.3612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We aimed to report our clinic's 11-year experience with cochlear implant (CI) revision surgeries.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a retrospective observational study. Patients who underwent CI and revision surgery at the same tertiary institution were enrolled in the study. Patients whose primary surgery was performed at another institution were excluded from the study. The patients' clinical charts, surgical records, and audiological and oral language outcomes were retrospectively examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-three (29 children, 4 adults) of 720 patients (871 CI) at our clinic required revision surgery, representing a revision surgery rate of 4.58%. The most common reason for revision was device failure (10 patients), followed by skin and electrode problems, with electrode tip fold-over in 6 patients, a broken electrode cable in 1 patient, skin flap complications in 6 patients, displacement of the magnet in 1 patient, cholesteatoma in 1 patient, electrode migration in 6 patients, misplacement of the electrode array into the internal acoustic canal in 1 patient, and explantation of the electrode cable in the external auditory canal in 1 patient. We had only one major complication after revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We recommend performing routine postoperative imaging, even if intraoperative telemetries are normal, to diagnose electrode misplacement or electrode tip fold-over. Additionally, we recommend long-term regular follow-up of children, in particular, because our study showed that the number of revision surgeries was higher in children who received implants at an early age.</p>","PeriodicalId":14607,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":"37 3","pages":"143-150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12126201/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/ijorl.2025.77740.3612","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to report our clinic's 11-year experience with cochlear implant (CI) revision surgeries.

Materials and methods: This was a retrospective observational study. Patients who underwent CI and revision surgery at the same tertiary institution were enrolled in the study. Patients whose primary surgery was performed at another institution were excluded from the study. The patients' clinical charts, surgical records, and audiological and oral language outcomes were retrospectively examined.

Results: Thirty-three (29 children, 4 adults) of 720 patients (871 CI) at our clinic required revision surgery, representing a revision surgery rate of 4.58%. The most common reason for revision was device failure (10 patients), followed by skin and electrode problems, with electrode tip fold-over in 6 patients, a broken electrode cable in 1 patient, skin flap complications in 6 patients, displacement of the magnet in 1 patient, cholesteatoma in 1 patient, electrode migration in 6 patients, misplacement of the electrode array into the internal acoustic canal in 1 patient, and explantation of the electrode cable in the external auditory canal in 1 patient. We had only one major complication after revision surgery.

Conclusion: We recommend performing routine postoperative imaging, even if intraoperative telemetries are normal, to diagnose electrode misplacement or electrode tip fold-over. Additionally, we recommend long-term regular follow-up of children, in particular, because our study showed that the number of revision surgeries was higher in children who received implants at an early age.

我们从人工耳蜗修复中学到了什么?
简介:我们的目的是报告我们诊所11年来人工耳蜗(CI)翻修手术的经验。材料和方法:本研究为回顾性观察性研究。在同一所高等教育机构接受CI和翻修手术的患者被纳入研究。在其他机构进行初次手术的患者被排除在研究之外。回顾性检查患者的临床图表、手术记录、听力学和口语结果。结果:720例患者(871 CI)中33例(29例儿童,4例成人)需要翻修手术,翻修手术率为4.58%。最常见的翻修原因是器械失效(10例),其次是皮肤和电极问题,其中电极尖端折叠6例,电极电缆断裂1例,皮瓣并发症6例,磁铁移位1例,胆脂瘤1例,电极移位6例,电极阵列错位进入内声道1例,电极移位1例。外耳道电极索外植1例。翻修手术后我们只有一个主要的并发症。结论:即使术中遥测正常,我们也建议进行常规的术后影像学检查,以诊断电极错位或电极尖端折叠。此外,我们特别建议对儿童进行长期定期随访,因为我们的研究表明,在早期接受种植体的儿童中,翻修手术的数量更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信