Literature DB >> 15141755

Conservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation.

Jan Kiefer1, Wolfgang Gstoettner, Wolfgang Baumgartner, Stephan Marcel Pok, Jochen Tillein, Qing Ye, Christoph von Ilberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: As results with cochlear implants have continued to improve, patients with some remaining cochlear function have become eligible for cochlear implantation. Thus, preservation of acoustic hearing after implantation has gained importance. Hearing preservation can be considered a benchmark for atraumatic implantation preventing neural degeneration from loss of residual hair cells or subsequent to local trauma. In this prospective study, the possibility of preserving low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation using a modified surgical technique has been explored.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective study design, 14 subjects with considerable low-frequency hearing of 20-60 dB in the frequency range 125-500 Hz but with unsatisfactory speech understanding with hearing aids of < 35% monosyllabic word understanding were implanted with a MED-EL COMBI-40+ cochlear implant. The insertion depth was intentionally limited to 19-24 mm to prevent damage to low-frequency regions of the cochlea. Pre- and postoperative pure-tone thresholds were measured.
RESULTS: Hearing was conserved within 0-10 dB in 9/14 subjects and within 11-20 dB in 3/14; in 2/14 subjects hearing was completely lost in the implanted ear. Thus hearing could at least partially be conserved in 12/14 subjects (86%). Median threshold values decreased by 10, 15, 17.5 and 5 dB at 125, 250, 500 and 1000 Hz, respectively. Even high levels of hearing, e.g. 30 dB at 500 Hz, could be maintained after implantation in some subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports successful conservation of hearing after cochlear implantation using a modified surgical technique. Even high levels of hearing could be maintained, showing that implantation of an intracochlear electrode can be performed atraumatically with preservation of functional structures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15141755     DOI: 10.1080/00016480310000755a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol        ISSN: 0001-6489            Impact factor:   1.494


  61 in total

1.  In vitro and in vivo pharmacokinetic study of a dexamethasone-releasing silicone for cochlear implants.

Authors:  Ya Liu; Claude Jolly; Susanne Braun; Thomas Stark; Elias Scherer; Stefan K Plontke; Jan Kiefer
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-08-29       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 2.  MED-EL Cochlear implants: state of the art and a glimpse into the future.

Authors:  Ingeborg Hochmair; Peter Nopp; Claude Jolly; Marcus Schmidt; Hansjörg Schösser; Carolyn Garnham; Ilona Anderson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-12

3.  Residual hearing in cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  Walter Di Nardo; Italo Cantore; Pietro Melillo; Francesca Cianfrone; Alessandro Scorpecci; Gaetano Paludetti
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Combining acoustic and electric stimulation in the service of speech recognition.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Rene H Gifford
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2010-09-27       Impact factor: 2.117

5.  Anatomy of the round window and hook region of the cochlea with implications for cochlear implantation and other endocochlear surgical procedures.

Authors:  Peter M M C Li; Haobing Wang; Clarinda Northrop; Saumil N Merchant; Joseph B Nadol
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  Across-site patterns of modulation detection in listeners with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Rose A Burkholder-Juhasz; Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 7.  Soft cochlear implantation: rationale for the surgical approach.

Authors:  David R Friedland; Christina Runge-Samuelson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-06

Review 8.  [Hearing with combined electric acoustic stimulation].

Authors:  U Baumann; S Helbig
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.284

9.  Two ears and two (or more?) devices: a pediatric case study of bilateral profound hearing loss.

Authors:  Rosalie M Uchanski; Lisa S Davidson; Sharon Quadrizius; Ruth Reeder; Jamie Cadieux; Jerrica Kettel; Richard A Chole
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-06

10.  Information from the voice fundamental frequency (F0) region accounts for the majority of the benefit when acoustic stimulation is added to electric stimulation.

Authors:  Ting Zhang; Michael F Dorman; Anthony J Spahr
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.