We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
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.
To evaluate the vestibular aqueduct in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss.
Methods:
We evaluated 19 patients (12 men and seven women; age range, 22−79 years) with unilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss, using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. All these patients had unilateral sudden sensorineural hearing loss. We also evaluated 47 control subjects (22 men and 25 women; age range, 22–79 years).
Results:
In sensorineural hearing loss affected ears, the width of the vestibular aqueduct at the midpoint and at the operculum was significantly greater than that in contralateral ears or in control ears. The width of the vestibular aqueduct at the midpoint and the operculum did not correlate with the audiometric threshold or the audiogram configuration. Contrast enhancement of the ipsilateral endolymphatic sac was observed in 17 of 19 patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (89 per cent). Eleven of these 17 patients also showed enhancement on the contralateral side, but no patient showed enhancement only on the contralateral side. In sensorineural hearing loss affected ears, the width of the vestibular aqueduct did not differ significantly between those patients with and without enhancement.
Conclusions:
The vestibular aqueducts of sudden sensorineural hearing loss affected ears are wider than those of controls. Precise imaging and evaluation of the inner ear is essential when investigating the pathological conditions responsible for sudden sensorineural hearing loss.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.