Literature DB >> 17597232

Partial deafness cochlear implantation in children.

Henryk Skarzynski1, Artur Lorens, Anna Piotrowska, Ilona Anderson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Partial deafness cochlear implantation and electric-acoustic stimulation have proven to be a useful method of treating adults with a ski-slope type hearing loss. Good hearing preservation and speech perception outcomes have been reported. This study aims to assess partial deafness cochlear implantation in children.
METHOD: Nine children, ranging in age from 4.2 to 12 years, received a cochlear implant following the round window surgical technique for partial deafness cochlear implantation. Hearing preservation was assessed by pure-tone audiometry and speech perception outcomes were measured using monosyllable word tests in quiet and noise. Data are available for most children up to a period of 1 year.
RESULTS: Hearing could be preserved partially in all cases, however, one child does not have sufficient preservation to make use of electric-acoustic stimulation. The eight children with sufficiently preserved hearing either use the natural low frequency hearing in combination with a cochlear implant to hear or use the DUET combined hearing system. Speech perception tests showed improvement in quiet and noise over time.
CONCLUSION: Results suggest that partial deafness cochlear implantation is a viable treatment method in children. However, surgery should only be conducted by an experienced surgeon and parents need to be carefully counselled about the risks and benefits of partial deafness cochlear implantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17597232     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2007.05.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0165-5876            Impact factor:   1.675


  13 in total

Review 1.  Soft cochlear implantation: rationale for the surgical approach.

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

Review 2.  [Hearing with combined electric acoustic stimulation].

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

3.  [Cochlear implants in children and adolescents].

Authors:  R Mlynski; S Plontke
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  Residual hearing preservation after pediatric cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Ryan F Brown; Timothy E Hullar; Jamie H Cadieux; Richard A Chole
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  [Present state of cochlear implant treatment in adults and children].

Authors:  J Maurer
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.284

6.  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

7.  Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) in Children: Investigating Benefit Afforded by Bilateral Versus Unilateral Acoustic Hearing.

Authors:  Jillian B Roberts; G Christopher Stecker; Jourdan T Holder; René H Gifford
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  Bilateral Cochlear Implants or Bimodal Hearing for Children with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

Authors:  René H Gifford
Journal:  Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep       Date:  2020-10-02

Review 9.  Factors affecting residual hearing preservation in cochlear implantation.

Authors:  D Zanetti; N Nassif; L O Redaelli de Zinis
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.124

10.  Health-related quality of life and mental distress in patients with partial deafness: preliminary findings.

Authors:  Katarzyna Cieśla; Monika Lewandowska; Henryk Skarżyński
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.