초록 열기/닫기 버튼
Background and Objectives The influence of anterior inferior cerebellar artery (AICA) loop on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the anatomical type of AICA loop and SSHL. Subjects and Method We reviewed the medical records of 69 ears from 60 patients with SSHL between January 2005 and April 2008, retrospectively. AICA loops were classified according to the Chavda classification method by magnetic resonance imaging. According to the extension depth of the loop in the internal auditory canal, it was classified as type I, II and III. The loop was classified as S (small diameter) and L (large diameter) by comparing the thickness of the loop with adjacent facial nerves. Results The predominant type of AICA loop was type I (68.1%) and type S (78.3%). There was no significant correlation between the pretreatment hearing level, extension depth and diameter. There was also no significant correlation between the rate of hearing recovery by Siegel’s criteria and diameter. However, there was significant correlation between the rate of hearing recovery by Siegel’s criteria and the types of the extension depth (p<0.05). The ears with type II and III of AICA loop presented higher rates of hearing recovery by Siegel’s criteria than those with type I. Conclusion This study suggests that the type II and III of AICA loop may be considered a good prognostic factor in SSHL.
Background and Objectives The influence of anterior inferior cerebellar artery (AICA) loop on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the anatomical type of AICA loop and SSHL. Subjects and Method We reviewed the medical records of 69 ears from 60 patients with SSHL between January 2005 and April 2008, retrospectively. AICA loops were classified according to the Chavda classification method by magnetic resonance imaging. According to the extension depth of the loop in the internal auditory canal, it was classified as type I, II and III. The loop was classified as S (small diameter) and L (large diameter) by comparing the thickness of the loop with adjacent facial nerves. Results The predominant type of AICA loop was type I (68.1%) and type S (78.3%). There was no significant correlation between the pretreatment hearing level, extension depth and diameter. There was also no significant correlation between the rate of hearing recovery by Siegel’s criteria and diameter. However, there was significant correlation between the rate of hearing recovery by Siegel’s criteria and the types of the extension depth (p<0.05). The ears with type II and III of AICA loop presented higher rates of hearing recovery by Siegel’s criteria than those with type I. Conclusion This study suggests that the type II and III of AICA loop may be considered a good prognostic factor in SSHL.
