Jonathan C Kopelovich1, Lina A J Reiss, Jacob J Oleson, Emily S Lundt, Bruce J Gantz, Marlan R Hansen. 1. *Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa; †Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Oregon Health Science University, Portland, Oregon; and ‡Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, U.S.A.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Residual low-frequency acoustic hearing benefits cochlear implantees in difficult listening situations such as understanding speech in noise and music appreciation. Most subjects retain functional residual hearing in the operated ear. A small number of patients, however, will lose significant ipsilateral residual hearing after short-electrode cochlear implantation. The objectives of this retrospective series are to determine whether predisposition to hearing loss after implantation exists in a subset of patients and to assess the functional impact of this hearing loss on clinical measures of combined electric and acoustic hearing. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial; tertiary care facility. PATIENTS: Hearing preservation cochlear implant recipients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Frequency-averaged ipsilateral hearing loss at 1 year after activation. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients from the Hybrid S8 FDA trial had serial postoperative audiometric measurements. Twenty-two of these patients, implanted at the home institution, provided additional medical data. Univariate analysis (Pearson's, Spearman's, Student's t test) showed that the severity of hearing loss at 1 year after activation was significantly correlated with age, male gender, and noise-induced hearing loss as the etiology of hearing impairment. A multivariate regression model corroborated these variables. No other medical factors were predictive. Clinical measures of speech perception (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant and Hearing in Noise Test) worsened with hearing loss in ipsilateral but not bilateral listening conditions. CONCLUSION: Age, male gender, and a history of noise-induced hearing loss correlate with the severity of hearing loss at 1 year after activation. Even the most severely affected patients benefit from bilateral electric and acoustic inputs.
OBJECTIVE: Residual low-frequency acoustic hearing benefits cochlear implantees in difficult listening situations such as understanding speech in noise and music appreciation. Most subjects retain functional residual hearing in the operated ear. A small number of patients, however, will lose significant ipsilateral residual hearing after short-electrode cochlear implantation. The objectives of this retrospective series are to determine whether predisposition to hearing loss after implantation exists in a subset of patients and to assess the functional impact of this hearing loss on clinical measures of combined electric and acoustic hearing. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial; tertiary care facility. PATIENTS: Hearing preservation cochlear implant recipients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Frequency-averaged ipsilateral hearing loss at 1 year after activation. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients from the Hybrid S8 FDA trial had serial postoperative audiometric measurements. Twenty-two of these patients, implanted at the home institution, provided additional medical data. Univariate analysis (Pearson's, Spearman's, Student's t test) showed that the severity of hearing loss at 1 year after activation was significantly correlated with age, male gender, and noise-induced hearing loss as the etiology of hearing impairment. A multivariate regression model corroborated these variables. No other medical factors were predictive. Clinical measures of speech perception (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant and Hearing in Noise Test) worsened with hearing loss in ipsilateral but not bilateral listening conditions. CONCLUSION: Age, male gender, and a history of noise-induced hearing loss correlate with the severity of hearing loss at 1 year after activation. Even the most severely affected patients benefit from bilateral electric and acoustic inputs.
Authors: Bruce J Gantz; Marlan R Hansen; Christopher W Turner; Jacob J Oleson; Lina A Reiss; Aaron J Parkinson Journal: Audiol Neurootol Date: 2009-04-22 Impact factor: 1.854
Authors: Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Martin G Larson; Joseph M Massaro; Ramachandran S Vasan Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-06-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jonathan C Kopelovich; Lina A J Reiss; Christine P Etler; Linjing Xu; J Tyler Bertroche; Bruce J Gantz; Marlan R Hansen Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Alex D Sweeney; Jacob B Hunter; Matthew L Carlson; Alejandro Rivas; Marc L Bennett; Rene H Gifford; Jack H Noble; David S Haynes; Robert F Labadie; George B Wanna Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: George B Wanna; Jack H Noble; Rene H Gifford; Mary S Dietrich; Alex D Sweeney; Dongqing Zhang; Benoit M Dawant; Alejandro Rivas; Robert F Labadie Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.311