Literature DB >> 17468676

Otosclerosis: selection of ear for cochlear implantation.

Alexia Georgina Matterson1, Stephen O'Leary, Darren Pinder, Lori Freidman, Richard Dowell, Robert Briggs.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: 1. To examine whether speech perception after implantation is correlated with the total duration of deafness, the duration of deafness in the implanted ear, or age at implantation. 2. To examine whether the rate of facial nerve stimulation postoperatively is correlated with the type of electrode used. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective case note review.
SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Fifty-nine adults with profound postlingual sensorineural hearing loss due to otosclerosis. INTERVENTION: Cochlear implantation with the Nucleus device using either a straight (n = 35) or Contour (n = 29) electrode array. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Speech perception scores for patients at 3, 6 and 12 months postimplantation were correlated against duration of deafness in the implanted ear, duration of total deafness, and age at implantation. Data on facial nerve stimulation rates postoperatively were collected.
RESULTS: Implantation in the shortest deafened ear conferred an initial advantage for speech perception 3 months after surgery; however, this effect was lost by 6 months. There were no significant correlations between the duration of bilateral deafness and hearing outcomes. Age at implantation was negatively correlated with outcome at 3 months, but not at 6 and 12 months. Fourteen of 35 patients with straight electrodes and 0 of 24 patients with Contour electrodes experienced facial nerve stimulation during mapping sessions (p < 0.005, chi).
CONCLUSION: Patients with otosclerosis are not disadvantaged in the long term by implantation in the longest deafened ear. Increasing age at implantation did not predict poorer outcomes. A perimodiolar design of electrode should be used in otosclerotic patients when possible to reduce the risk of facial nerve stimulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17468676     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31803115eb

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  6 in total

1.  Cochlear implantation among patients with otosclerosis: a systematic review of clinical characteristics and outcomes.

Authors:  Majed Assiri; Tawfiq Khurayzi; Afrah Alshalan; Abdulrahman Alsanosi
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  The pathologic basis of facial nerve stimulation in otosclerosis and multi-channel cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Mohammad Seyyedi; Barbara S Herrmann; Donald K Eddington; Joseph B Nadol
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.311

3.  Using the HISQUI29 to assess the sound quality levels of Spanish adults with unilateral cochlear implants and no contralateral hearing.

Authors:  Miryam Calvino; Javier Gavilán; Isabel Sánchez-Cuadrado; Rosa M Pérez-Mora; Elena Muñoz; Jesús Díez-Sebastián; Luis Lassaletta
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implantation: our experience.

Authors:  S Berrettini; De A Vito; L Bruschini; S Passetti; F Forli
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.124

Review 5.  Duration of deafness impacts auditory performance after cochlear implantation: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nikolai Bernhard; Ulrich Gauger; Eugenia Romo Ventura; Florian C Uecker; Heidi Olze; Steffen Knopke; Toni Hänsel; Annekatrin Coordes
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-02-04

6.  OTOPLAN, Cochlear Implant, and Far-Advanced Otosclerosis: Could the Use of Software Improve the Surgical Final Indication?

Authors:  Giampietro Ricci; Ruggero Lapenna; Valeria Gambacorta; Antonio Della Volpe; Mario Faralli; Arianna Di Stadio
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.316

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.