Paul W Bauer1, Peter S Roland. 1. Division of Pediatric Otolaryngology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas 75390, USA. paul.bauer@utsouthwestern.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the indications for which the Med-El compressed and split arrays have been used in the United States, to assess the success achieved in insertion, to determine hearing outcomes, and assess complications associated with using these arrays. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of data gathered during the US clinical trial. METHODS: Data were extracted concerning indications for use, depth of insertion, number of electrodes in use, 3 and 6 month performance outcomes, and complications. The results obtained in postmeningitic patients using the compressed array were compared with results of patients using the split array. RESULTS: Six adults and 22 children have been implanted with the compressed array. The principal indications have been postmeningitis or congenital cochlear malformations. The average improvement seen in the Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale scores was 17.6 for the compressed array group and 13.9 for the split array group. The same number of electrodes was inserted on average for both groups, with comparable numbers of electrodes in use. CONCLUSIONS: The Med-El compressed array is an alternative to a standard or split array in managing patients with postmeningitic deafness or congenital cochlear malformations. Benefits to these patients are most clearly seen in subjective measures.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the indications for which the Med-El compressed and split arrays have been used in the United States, to assess the success achieved in insertion, to determine hearing outcomes, and assess complications associated with using these arrays. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of data gathered during the US clinical trial. METHODS: Data were extracted concerning indications for use, depth of insertion, number of electrodes in use, 3 and 6 month performance outcomes, and complications. The results obtained in postmeningitic patients using the compressed array were compared with results of patients using the split array. RESULTS: Six adults and 22 children have been implanted with the compressed array. The principal indications have been postmeningitis or congenital cochlear malformations. The average improvement seen in the Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale scores was 17.6 for the compressed array group and 13.9 for the split array group. The same number of electrodes was inserted on average for both groups, with comparable numbers of electrodes in use. CONCLUSIONS: The Med-El compressed array is an alternative to a standard or split array in managing patients with postmeningitic deafness or congenital cochlear malformations. Benefits to these patients are most clearly seen in subjective measures.