gms | German Medical Science

79th Annual Meeting of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery

German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery

30.04. - 04.05.2008, Bonn

Revision surgery after cochlear implantation in pediatric age group

Meeting Abstract

Search Medline for

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie. 79. Jahresversammlung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie. Bonn, 30.04.-04.05.2008. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2008. Doc08hnod097

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at:

Published: April 22, 2008

© 2008 Sziklai.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( You are free: to Share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work, provided the original author and source are credited.



Introduction: Postoperative complications in cochlear implantation is still a matter of discussions. Utilisation of cochlear implants for hearing habilitaion/rehabilitation is a more than 2 decades history. Evidences accumulated confirming the reliability of this method. Among controversies, still some surgical aspects and the question of a foreign material implantation in the human body are concerns.

Methods: We use Med-El implants (Pulsar, n=2) and Nucleus 24M and K (m=40). The surgical technique is the Kronenberg’s suprameatal tunnel instead of mastoidectomy and posterior tympanotomy. The implanted population reported here is prelingual pediatric group implanted between 1.5–5 years old age.

Results: In our series of 42 implantees, the rate of major complications required revision surgery is 9.5%. Implant removal was necessary in one patient suffered from recurrent suppurative otitis media (2 years postimplantation, age 6 years). The No. 2. Patient developed a skin lesion (half a year postimplantation, age 3 years) beside the standard two layers wound closure surgical technique. The No. 3. Patient slowly provided with incapability of stimulation via an increasing number of electrodes (2 years postimplantation, age 5 years). The No. 4. Patient presented an extrusion of the electrode array (3 years postimplantation, age 6 years) towards the external ear canal.

Conclusions: Ten percent failure rate is high. Fifty percent is technical failure indicating removal of the implant. Technological improvement as well as standardization of implantation techniques may improve the outcome results.