Literature DB >> 25118584

Round window electrocochleography and speech perception outcomes in adult cochlear implant subjects: comparison with audiometric and biographical information.

Joseph H McClellan1, Eric J Formeister, William H Merwin, Margaret T Dillon, Nathan Calloway, Claire Iseli, Craig A Buchman, Douglas C Fitzpatrick, Oliver F Adunka.   

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: Intraoperative round window (RW) electrocochleography (ECoG) can help predict speech perception outcomes in adult cochlear implant (CI) recipients.
BACKGROUND: Speech perception outcomes using CIs are highly variable. Recent data demonstrated that intraoperative ECoG could account for nearly half the variance in postoperative word scores. The present study seeks to update this correlation with a larger sample size and determine if addition of clinical variables improves the prediction.
METHODS: Intraoperative RW ECoG was performed in adult subjects undergoing CI. Amplitudes of the ongoing response to tone bursts of multiple frequencies at 85 to 95 dB HL were summed to obtain the total response (ECoG-TR). ECoG-TR was correlated with postoperative speech perception scores. Multiple linear regression was used to combine clinical factors with the ECoG-TR.
RESULTS: The ECoG-TR accounted for 40% of the variance in CNC word scores (n = 32). The preoperative pure tone average (PTA) was the only clinical factor with a significant correlation (r² = 20%). The ability to predict word scores using ECoG-TR and PTA, or after addition of age and duration of hearing loss, was not significantly different from using ECoG-TR alone. For 2 outliers, ECoG-TR predicted a better word score than obtained.
CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of cochlear physiology before CI, reduced to a single variable, is a better predictor of postoperative speech perception than common clinical factors. Additional analysis of the outliers showed that waveform morphology can provide distinct information in individual cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25118584     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000557

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  27 in total

1.  Using Neural Response Telemetry to Monitor Physiological Responses to Acoustic Stimulation in Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Paul J Abbas; Viral D Tejani; Rachel A Scheperle; Carolyn J Brown
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Genetic variants in the peripheral auditory system significantly affect adult cochlear implant performance.

Authors:  A Eliot Shearer; Robert W Eppsteiner; Kathy Frees; Viral Tejani; Christina M Sloan-Heggen; Carolyn Brown; Paul Abbas; Camille Dunn; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz; Richard J H Smith
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Hair cell and neural contributions to the cochlear summating potential.

Authors:  Andrew K Pappa; Kendall A Hutson; William C Scott; J David Wilson; Kevin E Fox; Maheer M Masood; Christopher K Giardina; Stephen H Pulver; Gilberto D Grana; Charles Askew; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  The Compound Action Potential in Subjects Receiving a Cochlear Implant.

Authors:  William C Scott; Christopher K Giardina; Andrew K Pappa; Tatyana E Fontenot; Meredith L Anderson; Margaret T Dillon; Kevin D Brown; Harold C Pillsbury; Oliver F Adunka; Craig A Buchman; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Cochlear Microphonics in Hearing Preservation Cochlear Implantees.

Authors:  Artur Lorens; Adam Walkowiak; Marek Polak; Aleksandra Kowalczuk; Mariusz Furmanek; Henryk Skarzynski; Anita Obrycka
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 1.017

6.  Clinical role of electrocochleography in children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Tatyana E Fontenot; Christopher K Giardina; Holly F Teagle; Lisa R Park; Oliver F Adunka; Craig A Buchman; Kevin D Brown; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 1.675

7.  Response Changes During Insertion of a Cochlear Implant Using Extracochlear Electrocochleography.

Authors:  Christopher K Giardina; Tatyana E Khan; Stephen H Pulver; Oliver F Adunka; Craig A Buchman; Kevin D Brown; Harold C Pillsbury; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Round window electrocochleography before and after cochlear implant electrode insertion.

Authors:  Oliver F Adunka; Christopher K Giardina; Eric J Formeister; Baishakhi Choudhury; Craig A Buchman; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2015-09-11       Impact factor: 3.325

9.  Intracochlear Electrocochleography: Response Patterns During Cochlear Implantation and Hearing Preservation.

Authors:  Christopher K Giardina; Kevin D Brown; Oliver F Adunka; Craig A Buchman; Kendall A Hutson; Harold C Pillsbury; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 10.  Electric and Acoustic Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Hearing Preservation.

Authors:  Christopher Welch; Margaret T Dillon; Harold C Pillsbury
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-10-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.