Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:21:33.596Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Benefits of pre-labyrinthectomy intratympanic gentamicin: contralateral vestibular responses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2019

N Amiraraghi ,
M Gaggini ,
J A Crowther ,
R Locke ,
W Taylor  and
G Kontorinis
N Amiraraghi
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
M Gaggini
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
J A Crowther
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
R Locke
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
W Taylor
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Skull Base Unit, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
G Kontorinis*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Mr Georgios Kontorinis, Department of Otolaryngology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, 1345 Govan Road, Glasgow G51 4TF, Scotland, UK E-mail: gkontorinis@gmail.com Fax: +44 1413 478 028
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To determine the impact of pre-operative intratympanic gentamicin injection on the recovery of patients undergoing translabyrinthine resection of vestibular schwannomas.

Methods

This prospective, case–control pilot study included eight patients undergoing surgical labyrinthectomy, divided into two groups: four patients who received pre-operative intratympanic gentamicin and four patients who did not. The post-operative six-canal video head impulse test responses and length of in-patient stay were assessed.

Results

The average length of stay was shorter for patients who received intratympanic gentamicin (6.75 days; range, 6–7 days) than for those who did not (9.5 days; range, 8–11 days) (p = 0.0073). Additionally, the gentamicin group had normal post-operative video head impulse test responses in the contralateral ear, while the non-gentamicin group did not.

Conclusion

Pre-operative intratympanic gentamicin improves the recovery following vestibular schwannoma resection, eliminating, as per the video head impulse test, the impact of labyrinthectomy on the contralateral labyrinth.

Keywords

DizzinessGentamicinLabyrinthVestibular SchwannomaVestibular Function Tests
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 133 , Issue 8 , August 2019 , pp. 668 - 673
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Mr G Kontorinis takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

Presented orally at the Annual Meeting of the North American Skull Base Society, 16–18 February 2018, San Diego, California, USA.

References

1Čada, Z, Balatková, Z, Chovanec, M, Čakrt, O, Hrubá, S, Jeřábek, J et al. Vertigo perception and quality of life in patients after surgical treatment of vestibular schwannoma with pretreatment prehabituation by pharmacological vestibular ablation. Biomed Res Int 2016;2016:676721610.1155/2016/6767216Google Scholar
2Broomfield, SJ, Mandavia, AK, Nicholson, JS, Mahmoud, O, King, AT, Rutherford, SA et al. Long-term quality of life following vestibular schwannoma excision via the translabyrinthine approach. Otol Neurotol 2017;38:1165–73Google Scholar
3Mantokoudis, G, Schubert, MC, Saber, T, Ali, S, Wong, AL, Agrawal, Y. Early adaptation and compensation of clinical vestibular responses after unilateral vestibular deafferentation surgery. Otol Neurotol 2014;35:148–5410.1097/MAO.0b013e3182956196Google Scholar
4Halmagyi, GM, Chen, L, MacDougall, HG, Weber, KP, McGarvie, LA, Curthoys, IS. The video head impulse test. Front Neurol 2017;8:25810.3389/fneur.2017.00258Google Scholar
5MacDougall, HG, Weber, KP, McGarvie, LA, Halmagyi, GM, Curthoys, IS. The video head impulse test: diagnostic accuracy in peripheral vestibulopathy. Neurology 2009;73:1134–41Google Scholar
6Pullens, B, van Benthem, PP. Intratympanic gentamicin for Ménière's disease or syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(3):CD008234Google Scholar
7Watson, GJ, Nelson, C, Irving, RM. Is low-dose intratympanic gentamicin an effective treatment for Ménière's disease: the Birmingham experience. J Laryngol Otol 2015;129:970–3Google Scholar
8Giannuzzi, AL, Merkus, P, Falcioni, M. The use of intratympanic gentamicin in patients with vestibular schwannoma and disabling vertigo. Otol Neurotol 2013;34:1096–8Google Scholar
9Magnusson, M, Kahlon, B, Karlberg, M, Lindberg, S, Siesjö, P. Preoperative vestibular ablation with gentamicin and vestibular ‘prehab’ enhance postoperative recovery after surgery for pontine angle tumours--first report. Acta Otolaryngol 2007;127:1236–40Google Scholar
10Tjernström, F, Fransson, P, Kahlon, B, Karlberg, M, Lindberg, S, Siesjö, P et al. Vestibular PREHAB and gentamicin before schwannoma surgery may improve long-term postural function. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009;80:1254–60Google Scholar
11Batuecas-Caletrio, A, Santa Cruz-Ruiz, S, Muñoz-Herrera, A, Perez-Fernandez, N. The map of dizziness in vestibular schwannoma. Laryngoscope 2015;125:2784–9Google Scholar
12Lacour, M, Bernard-Demanze, L. Interaction between vestibular compensation mechanisms and vestibular rehabilitation therapy: 10 recommendations for optimal functional recovery. Front Neurol 2015;5:28510.3389/fneur.2014.00285Google Scholar
13Stevens, MN, Garrison, DB, Kaylie, DM. What is the potential clinical utility of vHIT when assessing adult patients with dizziness? Laryngoscope 2017;127:2689–90Google Scholar
14Han, BI, Song, HS, Kim, JS. Vestibular rehabilitation therapy: review of indications, mechanisms, and key exercises. J Clin Neurol 2011;7:184–96Google Scholar
15Cohen, HS. Disability and rehabilitation in the dizzy patient. Curr Opin Neurol 2006;19:49–54Google Scholar
16Snapp, HA, Schubert, MC. Habilitation of auditory and vestibular dysfunction. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2012;45:487–511Google Scholar
17Whitney, SL, Alghardir, AH, Anwer, S. Recent evidence about the effectiveness of vestibular rehabilitation. Curr Treat Options Neurol 2016;18:1310.1007/s11940-016-0395-4Google Scholar