OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Compare outcomes among children with inner ear malformations and/or cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) who have received a cochlear implant (CI). STUDY DESIGN: Individual retrospective cohort study from 1993 to 2010. METHODS: A select cohort of 76 children was identified. Imaging characteristics, operative findings, complications, mapping parameters, and performance were assessed. Comparisons among the different groups were undertaken. RESULTS: Surgery was mostly uncomplicated. Nearly all children demonstrated behavioral responses to CI stimulation irrespective of inner ear morphology or the presence of CND. Children with CND had higher pure tone averages (PTAs) and required greater charge for stimulation than other malformation types. Open-set speech perception was achieved in 100% of children with incomplete partition-enlarged vestibular aqueduct (IP-EVA), 50% of those with hypoplastic malformations, and 19% of CND cases. Robust responses on eighth nerve compound action potential (ECAP) testing through the implant was associated with higher levels of speech perception. Manually supplemented communication strategies were more common among children with hypoplastic malformations (69%) and CND (95%) than those with IP-EVA (18%). CONCLUSIONS: Children with IP-EVA malformations have an excellent prognosis for developing open-set speech perception and using oral communication modes following CI. On the contrary, children with severe malformations or CND may have elevated charge requirements for attaining sound detection alone. These children's prognosis for obtaining open-set speech understanding, using exclusive oral communication, and participating in mainstream education is more limited. These findings have important implications for considering alternative forms of intervention such as auditory brainstem implantation and/or supplementation with visually based communication strategies.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Compare outcomes among children with inner ear malformations and/or cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) who have received a cochlear implant (CI). STUDY DESIGN: Individual retrospective cohort study from 1993 to 2010. METHODS: A select cohort of 76 children was identified. Imaging characteristics, operative findings, complications, mapping parameters, and performance were assessed. Comparisons among the different groups were undertaken. RESULTS: Surgery was mostly uncomplicated. Nearly all children demonstrated behavioral responses to CI stimulation irrespective of inner ear morphology or the presence of CND. Children with CND had higher pure tone averages (PTAs) and required greater charge for stimulation than other malformation types. Open-set speech perception was achieved in 100% of children with incomplete partition-enlarged vestibular aqueduct (IP-EVA), 50% of those with hypoplastic malformations, and 19% of CND cases. Robust responses on eighth nerve compound action potential (ECAP) testing through the implant was associated with higher levels of speech perception. Manually supplemented communication strategies were more common among children with hypoplastic malformations (69%) and CND (95%) than those with IP-EVA (18%). CONCLUSIONS:Children with IP-EVA malformations have an excellent prognosis for developing open-set speech perception and using oral communication modes following CI. On the contrary, children with severe malformations or CND may have elevated charge requirements for attaining sound detection alone. These children's prognosis for obtaining open-set speech understanding, using exclusive oral communication, and participating in mainstream education is more limited. These findings have important implications for considering alternative forms of intervention such as auditory brainstem implantation and/or supplementation with visually based communication strategies.
Authors: Laurie S Eisenberg; Karen C Johnson; Amy S Martinez; Leslie Visser-Dumont; Dianne Hammes Ganguly; Jennifer F Still Journal: J Am Acad Audiol Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 1.664
Authors: Daniel I Choo; Kareem O Tawfik; Donna M Martin; Yehoash Raphael Journal: Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 3.908
Authors: Elina Kari; Lorida Llaci; John L Go; Marcus Naymik; James A Knowles; Suzanne M Leal; Sampath Rangasamy; Matthew J Huentelman; Winnie Liang; Rick A Friedman; Isabelle Schrauwen Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2020 Jul/Aug Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: Jennifer M Barnard; Laurel M Fisher; Karen C Johnson; Laurie S Eisenberg; Nae-Yuh Wang; Alexandra L Quittner; Christine M Carson; John K Niparko Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Juan Miguel Palomeque Vera; María Platero Sánchez-Escribano; Javier Gómez Hervás; María Fernández Prada; Amanda Rocío González Ramírez; Manuel Sainz Quevedo Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Shuman He; Xiuhua Chao; Ruijie Wang; Jianfen Luo; Lei Xu; Holly F B Teagle; Lisa R Park; Kevin D Brown; Michelle Shannon; Cynthia Warner; Angela Pellittieri; William J Riggs Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2020 May/Jun Impact factor: 3.570