Literature DB >> 16365217

Predictive models for cochlear implantation in elderly candidates.

Janice Leung1, Nae-Yuh Wang, Jennifer D Yeagle, Jill Chinnici, Stephen Bowditch, Howard W Francis, John K Niparko.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: An aging American population carries a high prevalence of profound sensorineural hearing loss. We examined the performance of multichannel cochlear implant recipients in a large database of adult subjects.
DESIGN: Nonconcurrent prospective study of a national cohort with multivariate regression analysis of preoperative and postoperative performance variables in multichannel cochlear implant recipients. We applied models of prediction established in previous studies to the observed results.
SETTING: Referral centers with active cochlear implant programs. PATIENTS: Adolescents and adults with profound hearing loss (N = 749; age range, 14-91 years). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Postoperative monosyllabic word recognition.
RESULTS: The population 65 years and older demonstrated a clinically insignificant 4.6%-smaller postoperative word score compared with the population younger than 65 years. When duration of deafness exceeded 25 years, elderly recipients demonstrated higher word scores than their younger counterparts. A more significant factor affecting outcomes is the ratio of duration of deafness to age at implantation.
CONCLUSIONS: Age at implantation carried relatively little predictive value for postoperative performance in subjects 65 years and older. Although a small decrement in mean speech recognition scores was evident, the clinical significance of this difference is questionable when all of the results observed in elderly patients are considered. A shorter percentage of life spent in severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss suggests a foundation of acoustic/auditory processing in the elderly cohort that may mitigate potential physiological effects associated with advanced age. This study confirms and extends previous observations that duration of profound deafness and residual speech recognition carry higher predictive value than the age at which an individual receives an implant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16365217     DOI: 10.1001/archotol.131.12.1049

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 0886-4470


  54 in total

Review 1.  Cochlear implants and brain stem implants.

Authors:  Richard T Ramsden
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.291

2.  Cochlear implant users' spectral ripple resolution.

Authors:  Eun Kyung Jeon; Christopher W Turner; Sue A Karsten; Belinda A Henry; Bruce J Gantz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Is age a limiting factor for adaptation to cochlear implant?

Authors:  Anne-Lise Hiel; Jean-Marc Gerard; Monique Decat; Naïma Deggouj
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-12-16       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Assessment of electrode placement and audiological outcomes in bilateral cochlear implantation.

Authors:  George B Wanna; Jack H Noble; Theodore R McRackan; Benoit M Dawant; Mary S Dietrich; Linsey D Watkins; Alejandro Rivas; Theodore A Schuman; Robert F Labadie
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 5.  The Enigma of Poor Performance by Adults With Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Aaron C Moberly; Chelsea Bates; Michael S Harris; David B Pisoni
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  Impact of electrode design and surgical approach on scalar location and cochlear implant outcomes.

Authors:  George B Wanna; Jack H Noble; Matthew L Carlson; René H Gifford; Mary S Dietrich; David S Haynes; Benoit M Dawant; Robert F Labadie
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Effect of Stimulation Rate on Speech Understanding in Older Cochlear-Implant Users.

Authors:  Maureen J Shader; Nicole Nguyen; Miranda Cleary; Ronna Hertzano; David J Eisenman; Samira Anderson; Sandra Gordon-Salant; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2020 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  The influence of various factors on the performance of repetition tests in adults with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Il Joon Moon; Eun Yeon Kim; Jin Ok Jeong; Won-Ho Chung; Yang-Sun Cho; Sung Hwa Hong
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-07-08       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Factors Affecting Outcomes in Cochlear Implant Recipients Implanted With a Perimodiolar Electrode Array Located in Scala Tympani.

Authors:  Laura K Holden; Jill B Firszt; Ruth M Reeder; Rosalie M Uchanski; Noël Y Dwyer; Timothy A Holden
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.311

10.  Role of electrode placement as a contributor to variability in cochlear implant outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Finley; Timothy A Holden; Laura K Holden; Bruce R Whiting; Richard A Chole; Gail J Neely; Timothy E Hullar; Margaret W Skinner
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.