OBJECTIVE: To report the audiological outcomes of cochlear implantation in two patients with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss secondary to superficial siderosis of the CNS and discuss some programming peculiarities that were found in these cases. METHOD: Retrospective review. Data concerning clinical presentation, diagnosis and audiological assessment pre- and post-implantation were collected of two patients with superficial siderosis of the CNS. RESULTS: Both patients showed good hearing thresholds but variable speech perception outcomes. One patient did not achieve open-set speech recognition, but the other achieved 70% speech recognition in quiet. Electrical compound action potentials could not be elicited in either patient. Map parameters showed the need for increased charge. Electrode impedances showed high longitudinal variability. CONCLUSION: The implants were fairly beneficial in restoring hearing and improving communication abilities although many reprogramming sessions have been required. The hurdle in programming was the need of frequent adjustments due to the physiologic variations in electrical discharges and neural conduction, besides the changes in the impedances. Patients diagnosed with superficial siderosis may achieve limited results in speech perception scores due to both cochlear and retrocochlear reasons. Careful counseling about the results must be given to the patients and their families before the cochlear implantation indication.
OBJECTIVE: To report the audiological outcomes of cochlear implantation in two patients with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss secondary to superficial siderosis of the CNS and discuss some programming peculiarities that were found in these cases. METHOD: Retrospective review. Data concerning clinical presentation, diagnosis and audiological assessment pre- and post-implantation were collected of two patients with superficial siderosis of the CNS. RESULTS: Both patients showed good hearing thresholds but variable speech perception outcomes. One patient did not achieve open-set speech recognition, but the other achieved 70% speech recognition in quiet. Electrical compound action potentials could not be elicited in either patient. Map parameters showed the need for increased charge. Electrode impedances showed high longitudinal variability. CONCLUSION: The implants were fairly beneficial in restoring hearing and improving communication abilities although many reprogramming sessions have been required. The hurdle in programming was the need of frequent adjustments due to the physiologic variations in electrical discharges and neural conduction, besides the changes in the impedances. Patients diagnosed with superficial siderosis may achieve limited results in speech perception scores due to both cochlear and retrocochlear reasons. Careful counseling about the results must be given to the patients and their families before the cochlear implantation indication.