Advances in Oto-Rhino-Laryngology最新文献

This chapter discusses the multifaceted future of cochlear implant design. Current research is focused on novel strategies relating to the electrode array, aiming to improve the neuronal health and spatial selectivity, and reduce the power consumption. Future design iterations will most likely improve the neuronal health by reducing insertion trauma, minimizing the inflammatory pathway that follows electrode insertion or through the use of neurotrophins or stem cells. Improvements in spatial selectivity and in speech recognition in difficult listening environments can be achieved through changes in the electrode/neural interface. Designing an array that brings the electrodes closer to neural tissue, or changing the method of stimulation with current steering or even optical or piezoelectric stimulation are discussed. Increasing the MRI compatibility is an important consideration, and devices allowing remote programming have a huge impact on worldwide provision. Technology exists to realize the elusive goal of a fully implantable cochlear implant, allowing continuous and invisible hearing. Ultimately, future technologies will be integrated to allow tailoring of implant design to the individual, thereby addressing the broad variability in user performance. At the same time, there is an urgent requirement for a high quality, low cost, mass-produced implant for the developing world.

Microtia and atresia cause significant conductive hearing loss of up to 60 dB HL. The bilateral cases suffer from severely restricted communication abilities and require immediate acoustic stimulation. There is also growing evidence that unilateral cases benefit from an early and selective stimulation of the affected side. Hearing restoration can be performed in selected cases of minor malformation by classic middle ear reconstruction. However, the majority of patients presumably benefit better from a hearing aid. There are 3 main types: active middle ear implants, active bone conduction implants and passive bone conduction implants. All implants improve speech perception, speech recognition, the signal-to-noise ratio and directional hearing. The extent varies among implants and requires further studies. Decision making on the implant type depends on the extent of malformation and hence the preoperative imaging. New scoring systems provide reliable risk stratification. Second it depends on the age of the patient. The active middle ear implants provide a selective stimulation of the affected side and are beneficial if implanted in the first years of life during the maturation period of the auditory system. In conclusion, hearing rehabilitation of congenital atresia should be performed as early as possible. This includes not only the bilateral but also the unilateral affected patients.

Cochlear implantation (CI), with attempted preservation of residual natural low-frequency hearing, is an increasingly accepted application of this technology, with potential benefits to the patient when listening in noise and in music appreciation. The full extent of the benefits of combining preserved natural hearing and electrical stimulation remain under evaluation. Various factors appear to influence the success of hearing preservation (HP) during CI, including electrode design, surgical approach, insertional trauma, steroid usage and patient factors. Currently, combining or contrasting outcomes of CI with attempted HP is difficult due to the use of heterogeneous outcome measures. Until we have a full understanding of the benefits of preserving residual low-frequency hearing during CI, there is merit in attempting to preserve all residual hearing. Likewise, preserving residual low-frequency hearing is a useful surrogate marker for atraumatic electrode design and insertion.

Although sleep and sleep disorders have been studied for centuries, it was the development of sophisticated tools to monitor eye movements, brain waves, and muscle tone in the mid-20th century that led to modern sleep research. These tools allowed neuroscientists to distinguish between different "states" or "phases" of sleep, and to relate these findings to sleep disorders. This review chronicles the groundbreaking work of the pioneers in this field, and the impact their findings have had on patients today.

Drug-induced sleep endoscopy was introduced in 1991 and has recently evolved into a pivotal instrument for patients in whom obstructive sleep apnea surgery is considered. Here, we discuss the indications, contraindications, technique, anesthesia, scoring systems, validity, and insights of the literature.

Obstructive sleep apnea is a highly prevalent and poorly understood condition that not only leads to significant individual patient health damage, but carries a large societal cost secondary to excessive healthcare utilization, motor-vehicle accidents, and work absenteeism. While a significant fund of knowledge about its damaging effects on the cardiovascular system and neural pathways has been gathered over the past few decades, the translation to direct patient care still presents numerous challenges. With the exception of clear issues such as socially unacceptable snoring and breathing irregularities, the exact cause and effect relationship between airway narrowing, hypoxemia, and sleep fragmentation with subjective sleep-related complaints and neurocognitive symptoms is less clear. Besides better-defined clinical diagnostic criteria, the need for clear serum, saliva, or urine biomarkers to assess the physiologic burden of disease remains a work in progress, as are well-defined long-term clinically relevant outcomes of interest. Here, readers will be guided to a critical evaluation on the current main metrics of sleep study, suggested steps on diagnostic and treatment goals, and introduced to the concept of a continuum of disease.

Oral appliances that advance the mandible are widely used as alternatives to positive airway pressure (PAP) devices or as primary therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults. Although PAP is more efficacious at lowering the polysomnographic indices of OSA, the clinical effectiveness of PAP and oral appliances is similar, and patients are more likely to adhere to oral appliance therapy than to PAP treatment. Clinical examination is used to determine the candidacy of oral appliances and to select a particular appliance for a given patient. Endoscopic examination of the pharynx may be used to help assess the potential for efficacy. Otherwise, if available, titration of mandibular protrusion during sleep may be performed prior to appliance production in order to assess efficacy. Once a patient is fitted with a titratable oral appliance, further advancement is usually performed at home to resolve the clinical symptoms and signs of OSA. Clinical follow-up is needed to assess the outcome, side effects, and adherence, as the long-term adherence rate is approximately 50%. Recent advances in oral appliance therapy include the development of embedded temperature sensors for adherence monitoring and the production of thinner, lighter appliances via 3D printing techniques.

The primary pathological event in the disorder obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is the partial or complete closure of the pharyngeal airway during sleep in an individual with a widely patent airway during wakefulness. This yields an apnea or hypopnea with resulting hypoxia and hypercapnia, and most often requires an arousal to terminate the event. These events occur in a repetitive manner during sleep, yielding intermittent hypoxia and sleep fragmentation with their associated adverse effects on the health and quality of life of the afflicted individual. Here, we focus on the events leading up to these apneas and hypopneas, primarily addressing pharyngeal anatomy, upper airway muscle control, the respiratory arousal threshold, and ventilatory control instability in OSA pathophysiology.

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the primary treatment of obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome (OSA). Most sleep physicians are in agreement that a certain number of OSA patients cannot or will not use CPAP. Although other conservative therapies, such as oral appliance, sleep hygiene, and sleep positioning, may help some of these patients, there are many who fail all conservative treatments. As sleep surgeons, we have the responsibility to screen patients for both symptoms and signs of OSA. As experts of upper airway diseases, we often view an airway clearly and help the patient understand the importance of assessment and treatment for OSA. Surgery for OSA is not a substitute for CPAP but is a salvage treatment for those who failed CPAP and other conservative therapies and therefore have no other options. Most early studies and reviews focused on the efficacy of uvulopalatopharyngoplasty, a single-level procedure for the treatment of OSA. Since OSA is usually caused by multilevel obstructions, the true focus on efficacy should be on multilevel surgical intervention. The purpose here is to provide an updated overview of multilevel surgery for OSA patients.

In the practice of sleep medicine, the first step is identification of those patients at high risk for sleep apnea. Nearly every physician and every hospital has preferred methods of screening. Many patient questionnaires or surveys as well as some objective physical measurements have been suggested to predict the presence of sleep apnea. Screening is well established, and laboratory and home testing are widely available. An early assessment with a physical examination can help direct treatment planning. The Friedman tongue position, lingual tonsil hypertrophy grading, and the effects of oral positioning on the hypopharynx should be used in early assessment for treatment planning, and as screening tools to assess the sight of obstruction. Although these screening tools are not substitutes for drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE), they are crucial in early assessment as many patients do not require surgery or DISE early in the evaluation.