Comparing Approaches for Repair of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence

Objective. Compare outcomes for subjects who underwent middle cranial fossa (MCF) or transmastoid (TM) repair of superior semicircular canal dehiscence (SSCD). Study Design. Retrospective cohort study. Setting. Quaternary-care, academic neurotology practice. Methods. Subjects who underwent MCF or TM repair of SSCD between December 1999 and April 2023 were identified. Main outcome measures included demographic data, length of surgery and hospital stay, clinical presentation, and audiometric testing. Results. Ninety-three subjects (97 ears) who underwent surgery for SSCD met inclusion criteria: 58.8% (57) via MCF, 39.2% (38) via TM, and 2.0% (2) via TM + MCF. Median operative time was shorter for the TM (35) compared to the MCF (29) approach (118 vs 151 minutes, P < .001). Additionally, median hospital stays were shorter for TM (36) compared to the MCF (56) approach (15.3 vs 67.7 hours, P < .001). Overall, 92% (49/53) of MCF and 92% (33/36) of TM surgeries resulted in an improvement or resolution of one or more symptoms (P = .84). There was no significant preoperative to postoperative change in the median air conduction pure-tone average (PTA), air-bone gap, or word recognition score in both the MCF and TM groups (P > .05). Improvements of >10 dB in the pre- to postoperative absolute change in bone conduction PTA were noted in 3 subjects in the MCF group and 4 subjects in the TM group (P = .49). Conclusion. The TM approach for SSCD demonstrates shorter operative times and length of hospital stay. The TM and MCF approaches have comparable audiometric and clinical outcomes.