Literature DB >> 22213748

Cochlear implantation in prelingually deafened adolescents.

Daniel M Zeitler1, Abbas Anwar, Janet E Green, James S Babb, David R Friedmann, J Thomas Roland, Susan B Waltzman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of cochlear implantation (CI) in prelingually deafened adolescent children and to evaluate predictive variables for successful outcomes.
DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 10 to 17 years with prelingual hearing loss (mean length of deafness, 11.5 years) who received a unilateral CI (mean age at CI, 12.9 years). INTERVENTION: Unilateral CI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standard speech perception testing (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant [CNC] monosyllabic word test and Hearing in Noise [HINT] sentence test) was performed preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively (year 1), and at the last follow-up/end of the study (EOS).
RESULTS: There was a highly significant improvement in speech perception scores for both HINT sentence and CNC word testing from the preoperative testing to year 1 (mean change score, 51.10% and 32.23%, respectively; P < .001) and from the preoperative testing to EOS (mean change score, 60.02% and 38.73%, respectively; P < .001), with a significantly greater increase during the first year (P < .001). In addition, there was a highly significant correlation between improvements in performance scores on the CNC word and HINT sentence speech perception tests and both age at CI and length of deafness at the year 1 testing (P ≤.009) but not from the year 1 testing to EOS testing. Adolescents with progressive deafness and those using oral communication before CI performed significantly better than age-matched peers.
CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents with prelingual deafness undergoing unilateral CI show significant improvement in objective hearing outcome measures. Patients with shorter lengths of deafness and earlier age at CI tend to outperform their peers. In addition, patients with progressive deafness and those using oral communication have significantly better objective outcomes than their peers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22213748     DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.574

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med        ISSN: 1072-4710


  6 in total

1.  Late Cochlear Implantation in Early-Deafened Adults: A Detailed Analysis of Auditory and Self-Perceived Benefits.

Authors:  Joke Debruyne; Miranda Janssen; Jan Brokx
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 1.854

2.  The Effect of Age at Cochlear Implantation on Speech and Auditory Performances in Prelingually Deaf Children.

Authors:  Neha Shakrawal; Nishi Sonkhya; Sunita Agarwal; Mohnish Grover
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2020-02-20

3.  Long term results in late implanted adolescent and adult CI recipients.

Authors:  Ersilia Bosco; Maria Nicastri; Deborah Ballantyne; Marika Viccaro; Giovanni Ruoppolo; Alessandra Ionescu Maddalena; Patrizia Mancini
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Functional Outcomes and Quality of Life after Cochlear Implantation in Patients with Long-Term Deafness.

Authors:  Attila Ovari; Lisa Hühnlein; David Nguyen-Dalinger; Daniel Fabian Strüder; Christoph Külkens; Oliver Niclaus; Jens Eduard Meyer
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 4.964

5.  The Effect of Age, Type of Noise, and Cochlear Implants on Adaptive Sentence-in-Noise Task.

Authors:  Riki Taitelbaum-Swead; Leah Fostick
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-10-04       Impact factor: 4.964

6.  Listening in Noise Remains a Significant Challenge for Cochlear Implant Users: Evidence from Early Deafened and Those with Progressive Hearing Loss Compared to Peers with Normal Hearing.

Authors:  Yael Zaltz; Yossi Bugannim; Doreen Zechoval; Liat Kishon-Rabin; Ronen Perez
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 4.241

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.