Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Superior Canal Dehiscence Treatment & Management

  • Author: Wayne T Shaia, MD; Chief Editor: Arlen D Meyers, MD, MBA  more...
 
Updated: Feb 01, 2016
 

Surgical Care

Surgical correction of superior canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS) is reserved for patients with severe disabling symptoms.

Recently, albeit rare, it has been found that children also can have with superior canal dehiscence. They are almost always asymptomatic, and their management is no different from that of adults. Usually, they present with auditory complaints initially, and conservative management is recommended; however, if a child has complaints of vertigo, surgical management may be indicated.[7]

The treatment options for patients with SCDS are still expanding, with new innovative methods under development.

Traditional middle fossa craniotomy and repair of fistula

In this procedure, patients undergo a middle cranial fossa craniotomy on the affected side. The temporal lobe is gently retracted. Upon elevation of the dura, care is required to avoid stretching the greater superficial petrosal nerve, which could injure the facial nerve. The region of the superior semicircular canal is located with identification of the arcuate eminence. A dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal can be covered with bone wax, bone cement, or fascia, or the canal can be ablated with wax or bone cement.

Endoscopic craniotomy approach

In this procedure, patients undergo a middle cranial fossa craniotomy through a small, limited-access craniotomy of 2 cm or less on the affected side. The temporal lobe is gently retracted. Upon elevation of the dura, a small endoscope is gently inserted, and the dehiscence is identified and resurfaced. This approach has an average hospital stay of 2 days and a smaller incision than the typical middle fossa approach originally described. Presented at the Virginia Society of Otolaryngology in 2010, Shaia and Peng discussed 10 patients who underwent this modified approached relief of preoperative symptoms of more than 90% with no adverse outcomes. One patient had continued vestibular complaints for 12 months after the procedure that eventually resolved. This approach allows the surgeon visualization of the dehiscence without the need for a larger craniotomy.

Transmastoid superior canal occlusion

In this approach, a mastoidectomy is performed and the superior semicircular canal is identified near the ossicular heads. The superior semicircular canal is then ablated with a combination of tissue and fascia. Brantberg et al performed a superior canal–plugging procedure via a transmastoid approach in 2 patients.[8] Postoperatively, sound- and pressure-induced symptoms and nystagmus were resolved in response to offending stimuli. Although this approach can be effective, the risk of sensorineural hearing loss increases with this procedure because of limited exposure versus middle fossa craniotomy.

Minimally invasive approach via transcanal oval and round window reinforcement

The optimal surgical treatment of superior canal dehiscence syndrome has yet to be determined. Rather than directly addressing the dehiscent canal via a middle fossa craniotomy, an innovative approach first described by Kartush suggested that dampening the inner ear's sensitivity by reinforcing the oval and round windows may alleviate symptoms in some patients.[9]

The concept is to reduce the effects of a third window at the superior semicircular canal by reinforcing the other 2 natural windows. By dampening the presumed hypercompliance of the inner ear at the round windows, rather than intracranial, the risks of craniotomy, which include death, stroke, cranial palsies, and cerebrospinal fluid leaks, are avoided.

This procedure can be performed under local anesthesia. A transcanal approach to the middle ear is performed with elevation of the tympanic membrane. Small amounts of fascia are harvested from a postauricular incision are used to reinforce both the oval and round windows. The risks of the procedure, performed on an outpatient basis, are extremely low.

The preliminary study by Kartush in 2002 propagated discussions with others in the field of otology/neurology. As a result, a combined multi-institutional study under the direction of Silverstein was initiated in 2011 and was presented at the 2012 American Academy of Otolaryngology Annual meeting.[10, 11]

Twenty-two patients from 4 centers who opted for the minimally invasive approach via transcanal oval and/or round window reinforcement were studied. In this study, most had only round window reinforcement. Symptoms improved in nearly all patients treated with this novel method. A total of 21 patients completed a postoperative survey, grading preoperative and postoperative symptom severity. The questionnaire measured the 9 symptoms, including autophony, sensitivity to bone conduction, pulsatile tinnitus, sensitivity to loud sounds, dizziness on straining, dizziness on increased middle ear pressure loss, aural fullness, and imbalance. Analysis revealed statistically significant improvement in nearly all symptoms. The only symptom that did not improve was hearing loss.

If future studies confirm that such a minimally invasive procedure is routinely effective, middle fossa craniotomy or transmastoid approaches with resurfacing or occlusion of the canal could then be reserved for patients with persistent symptoms.

Combination approach

Gianoli and Soileau have advocated a combination approach.[10] In this technique, the superior canal defect is repaired via the middle fossa approach with concomitant reinforcement of the oval and round windows. The authors claim improved outcomes over middle fossa repair alone, reporting a resolution of vertigo in 24 cases with a 5-year follow-up period.

Next

Consultations

Consultation with an otologist or neurotologist should be obtained in any patient with symptoms that coincide with superior canal dehiscence.

Previous
Next

Complications

A study by Barber et al indicated that new-onset benign paroxysmal positional vertigo often follows repair of SCDS. The study found that 23.8% of patients who underwent the surgery developed this form of vertigo, compared with 6.2% of those who did not undergo the operation. Moreover, the vertigo was known to be lateralized to the side on which surgery was performed in all but one affected surgical patient (in whom the laterality was not known). The investigators suggested that the vertigo may result from otolith mobilization caused by inner ear pressure changes.[12]

Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Wayne T Shaia, MD Director, The Balance and Ear Center

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Jack M Kartush, MD Clinical Professor, Department of Otolaryngology, Wayne State University School of Medicine; Professor Emeritus, Michigan Ear Institute at Providence Hospital; Clinical Professor, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine

Jack M Kartush, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Gerard J Gianoli, MD Clinical Associate Professor, Departments of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and Pediatrics, Tulane University School of Medicine; President, The Ear and Balance Institute; Board of Directors, Ponchartrain Surgery Center

Gerard J Gianoli, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Otological Society, Society of University Otolaryngologists-Head and Neck Surgeons, Triological Society, American Neurotology Society, American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American College of Surgeons

Disclosure: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant or trustee for: Vesticon<br/>Received none from Vesticon, Inc. for board membership.

Chief Editor

Arlen D Meyers, MD, MBA Professor of Otolaryngology, Dentistry, and Engineering, University of Colorado School of Medicine

Arlen D Meyers, MD, MBA is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American Head and Neck Society

Disclosure: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant or trustee for: Cerescan;RxRevu;SymbiaAllergySolutions<br/>Received income in an amount equal to or greater than $250 from: Symbia<br/>Received from Allergy Solutions, Inc for board membership; Received honoraria from RxRevu for chief medical editor; Received salary from Medvoy for founder and president; Received consulting fee from Corvectra for senior medical advisor; Received ownership interest from Cerescan for consulting; Received consulting fee from Essiahealth for advisor; Received consulting fee from Carespan for advisor; Received consulting fee from Covidien for consulting.

Additional Contributors

Robert A Battista, MD, FACS Assistant Professor of Otolaryngology, Northwestern University, The Feinberg School of Medicine; Physician, Ear Institute of Chicago, LLC

Robert A Battista, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Illinois State Medical Society, American Neurotology Society, American College of Surgeons

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

Angela Shu-Yuen Peng, MD Resident Physician, Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center

Angela Shu-Yuen Peng, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, American Medical Association, and Virginia Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. Chilvers G, McKay-Davies I. Recent advances in superior semicircular canal dehiscence syndrome. J Laryngol Otol. 2015 Mar. 129 (3):217-25. [Medline].

  2. Minor LB. Superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Am J Otol. 2000 Jan. 21(1):9-19. [Medline].

  3. Tsunoda A, Terasaki O. Dehiscence of the bony roof of the superior semicircular canal in the middle cranial fossa. J Laryngol Otol. 2002 Jul. 116(7):514-8. [Medline].

  4. Brantberg K, Verrecchia L. Testing vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials with 90-dB clicks is effective in the diagnosis of superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Audiol Neurootol. Sep 2009. 14(1):54-8. [Medline].

  5. Verrecchia L, Westin M, Duan M, Brantberg K. Ocular vestibular evoked myogenic potentials to vertex low frequency vibration as a diagnostic test for superior canal dehiscence. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016 Jan 12. [Medline].

  6. White JA, Hughes GB, Ruggieri PN. Vibration-induced nystagmus as an office procedure for the diagnosis of superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Otol Neurotol. 2007 Oct. 28(7):911-6. [Medline].

  7. Lee GS, Zhou G, Poe D, Kenna M, Amin M, Ohlms L, et al. Clinical experience in diagnosis and management of superior semicircular canal dehiscence in children. Laryngoscope. 2011 Oct. 121(10):2256-61. [Medline].

  8. Brantberg K, Bergenius J, Mendel L, Witt H, Tribukait A, Ygge J. Symptoms, findings and treatment in patients with dehiscence of the superior semicircular canal. Acta Otolaryngol. 2001 Jan. 121(1):68-75. [Medline].

  9. Kartush JK. Superior Canal Dehiscence Syndrome symptoms resolved by reinforcement of the oval and round windows. Unpublished data. 2002.

  10. Silverstein et al. Round Window Reinforcement for Superior Canal Dehiscence. Oto-HNS. Sept 2012. 147:93.

  11. Silverstein H, Kartush JM, Parnes LS, Poe DS, Babu SC, Levenson MJ. Round window reinforcement for superior semicircular canal dehiscence: A retrospective multi-center case series. Am J Otolaryngol. 2014 May-Jun. 35(3):286-93. [Medline].

  12. Barber SR, Cheng YS, Owoc M, et al. Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo commonly occurs following repair of superior canal dehiscence. Laryngoscope. 2015 Dec 15. [Medline].

  13. Gianoli GJ, Soileau JS. The dehiscent middle fossa: prevalence, manifestations, associated findings and results of 24 surgical explorations for superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Publication pending: presented as triologic thesis, 2005.

  14. Banerjee A, Whyte A, Atlas MD. Superior canal dehiscence: review of a new condition. Clin Otolaryngol. 2005. Feb 30(1):9-15. [Medline].

  15. Brantberg K, Ishiyama A, Baloh RW. Drop attacks secondary to superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Neurology. 2005 Jun 28. 64(12):2126-8. [Medline].

  16. Deutschländer A, Strupp M, Jahn K, Jäger L, Quiring F, Brandt T. Vertical oscillopsia in bilateral superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Neurology. 2004 Mar 9. 62(5):784-7. [Medline].

  17. Hennebert C. A new syndrome in hereditary syphilis of the labyrinth. Presse Med Belg Brux. 1911. 63:467.

  18. Hillman TA, Kertesz TR, Hadley K, Shelton C. Reversible peripheral vestibulopathy: the treatment of superior canal dehiscence. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Mar. 134(3):431-6. [Medline].

  19. Martin JE, Neal CJ, Monacci WT, Eisenman DJ. Superior semicircular canal dehiscence: a new indication for middle fossa craniotomy. Case report. J Neurosurg. 2004 Jan. 100(1):125-7. [Medline].

  20. Merchant SN, Rosowski JJ, McKenna MJ. Superior semicircular canal dehiscence mimicking otosclerotic hearing loss. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2007. 65:137-45. [Medline].

  21. Mikulec AA, McKenna MJ, Ramsey MJ, Rosowski JJ, Herrmann BS, Rauch SD. Superior semicircular canal dehiscence presenting as conductive hearing loss without vertigo. Otol Neurotol. 2004 Mar. 25(2):121-9. [Medline].

  22. Mikulec AA, Poe DS, McKenna MJ. Operative management of superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Laryngoscope. 2005. Mar 115(3):501-7. [Medline].

  23. Minor LB. Clinical manifestations of superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Laryngoscope. 2005. Oct 15(10):1717-27. [Medline].

  24. Minor LB, Carey JP, Cremer PD, Lustig LR, Streubel SO, Ruckenstein MJ. Dehiscence of bone overlying the superior canal as a cause of apparent conductive hearing loss. Otol Neurotol. 2003 Mar. 24(2):270-8. [Medline].

  25. Minor LB. Clinical manifestations of superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Laryngoscope. 2005. Oct;115(10):1717-27. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  26. Streubel SO, Cremer PD, Carey JP, Weg N, Minor LB. Vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials in the diagnosis of superior canal dehiscence syndrome. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl. 2001. 545:41-9. [Medline].

  27. Teixido MT, Artz GJ, Kung BC. Clinical experience with symptomatic superior canal dehiscence in a single neurotologic practice. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. Sep 2008. 139(3):405-13. [Medline].

  28. Tullio P. Das Ohr und die Entstehung der Sprache und Schrift Berlin. Urban & Schwarzenberg,. 1929.

  29. [Guideline] Vlastarakos PV, Proikas K, Tavoulari E, Kikidis D, Maragoudakis P, Nikolopoulos TP. Efficacy assessment and complications of surgical management for superior semicircular canal dehiscence: a meta-analysis of published interventional studies. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2009 Feb. 266 (2):177-86. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
Coronal high-resolution computed tomography scan (1-mm sections) that demonstrates the presence of the superior semicircular canal (figure A, black arrow). As the scan is followed posteriorly (figures B, C, D), the bony dehiscence over the superior canal (black arrow) becomes more apparent.
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.