Omer Zarchi, Amir Amitai, Joseph Attias, Eyal Raveh, Tally Greenstein, Susan Alpert, Eyal Marcado
{"title":"人工耳蜗植入是否应作为经颅刺激的禁忌症?具有安全含义的案例研究。","authors":"Omer Zarchi, Amir Amitai, Joseph Attias, Eyal Raveh, Tally Greenstein, Susan Alpert, Eyal Marcado","doi":"10.1002/lary.31882","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Electrical stimulation in proximity to a cochlear implant (CI) is contraindicated due to the potential risk of damaging the implant and thermal insult to the inner ear. Yet, during surgical procedures that pose a risk to the nervous system, the use of transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring is crucial for assessing the integrity of the motor pathways and preventing neurological insults. The current paper depicts a case of a patient with CI undergoing two consecutive surgeries for scoliosis correction, revealing a suspected pending neurological insult in the second operation. An audiological and electrical examination after each operation demonstrated preserved auditory function and normal functioning of the CI, respectively. The current case is consistent with previous reports reviewed in the paper, showing no CI failures nor hearing deterioration following transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring and electroconvulsive therapy. In light of this accumulating evidence, there is an urgent need for manufacturers and regulatory bodies to proactively undertake a comprehensive review of this declared contraindication. Subsequently, an updated data-driven risk analysis is essential to weigh the consequences of preventing the contraindicated tools and treatments, as well as their potential benefits to these patients. Laryngoscope, 2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":49921,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should Cochlear Implant Contraindicate Transcranial Stimulation? A Case Study with Safety Implications.\",\"authors\":\"Omer Zarchi, Amir Amitai, Joseph Attias, Eyal Raveh, Tally Greenstein, Susan Alpert, Eyal Marcado\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/lary.31882\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Electrical stimulation in proximity to a cochlear implant (CI) is contraindicated due to the potential risk of damaging the implant and thermal insult to the inner ear. Yet, during surgical procedures that pose a risk to the nervous system, the use of transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring is crucial for assessing the integrity of the motor pathways and preventing neurological insults. The current paper depicts a case of a patient with CI undergoing two consecutive surgeries for scoliosis correction, revealing a suspected pending neurological insult in the second operation. An audiological and electrical examination after each operation demonstrated preserved auditory function and normal functioning of the CI, respectively. The current case is consistent with previous reports reviewed in the paper, showing no CI failures nor hearing deterioration following transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring and electroconvulsive therapy. In light of this accumulating evidence, there is an urgent need for manufacturers and regulatory bodies to proactively undertake a comprehensive review of this declared contraindication. Subsequently, an updated data-driven risk analysis is essential to weigh the consequences of preventing the contraindicated tools and treatments, as well as their potential benefits to these patients. Laryngoscope, 2024.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laryngoscope\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laryngoscope\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.31882\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.31882","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在人工耳蜗 (CI) 附近进行电刺激是禁忌的,因为有损坏人工耳蜗和对内耳造成热损伤的潜在风险。然而,在对神经系统构成风险的手术过程中,使用经颅电刺激进行神经监测对于评估运动通路的完整性和防止神经损伤至关重要。本文描述了一例连续接受两次脊柱侧弯矫正手术的 CI 患者,在第二次手术中发现了疑似待处理的神经损伤。每次手术后进行的听力和电学检查分别显示听觉功能和 CI 功能正常。本病例与本文回顾的以往报告一致,均显示经颅电刺激神经监测和电休克治疗后,CI 没有失效,听力也没有恶化。鉴于这些不断积累的证据,制造商和监管机构迫切需要积极主动地对这一已宣布的禁忌症进行全面审查。随后,必须进行以数据为导向的最新风险分析,以权衡预防禁用工具和治疗的后果及其对这些患者的潜在益处。喉镜》,2024 年。
Should Cochlear Implant Contraindicate Transcranial Stimulation? A Case Study with Safety Implications.
Electrical stimulation in proximity to a cochlear implant (CI) is contraindicated due to the potential risk of damaging the implant and thermal insult to the inner ear. Yet, during surgical procedures that pose a risk to the nervous system, the use of transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring is crucial for assessing the integrity of the motor pathways and preventing neurological insults. The current paper depicts a case of a patient with CI undergoing two consecutive surgeries for scoliosis correction, revealing a suspected pending neurological insult in the second operation. An audiological and electrical examination after each operation demonstrated preserved auditory function and normal functioning of the CI, respectively. The current case is consistent with previous reports reviewed in the paper, showing no CI failures nor hearing deterioration following transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring and electroconvulsive therapy. In light of this accumulating evidence, there is an urgent need for manufacturers and regulatory bodies to proactively undertake a comprehensive review of this declared contraindication. Subsequently, an updated data-driven risk analysis is essential to weigh the consequences of preventing the contraindicated tools and treatments, as well as their potential benefits to these patients. Laryngoscope, 2024.
期刊介绍:
The Laryngoscope has been the leading source of information on advances in the diagnosis and treatment of head and neck disorders since 1890. The Laryngoscope is the first choice among otolaryngologists for publication of their important findings and techniques. Each monthly issue of The Laryngoscope features peer-reviewed medical, clinical, and research contributions in general otolaryngology, allergy/rhinology, otology/neurotology, laryngology/bronchoesophagology, head and neck surgery, sleep medicine, pediatric otolaryngology, facial plastics and reconstructive surgery, oncology, and communicative disorders. Contributions include papers and posters presented at the Annual and Section Meetings of the Triological Society, as well as independent papers, "How I Do It", "Triological Best Practice" articles, and contemporary reviews. Theses authored by the Triological Society’s new Fellows as well as papers presented at meetings of the American Laryngological Association are published in The Laryngoscope.
• Broncho-esophagology
• Communicative disorders
• Head and neck surgery
• Plastic and reconstructive facial surgery
• Oncology
• Speech and hearing defects