OBJECTIVE: To evaluate hearing preservation (HP) outcomes in adult cochlear implant recipients with a mid-scala electrode. SETTING: Tertiary academic center. PATIENTS: Adult patients implanted with a mid-scala electrode between May 2013 and July 2015. INTERVENTIONS: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Age, sex, surgical approach, residual hearing changes post cochlear implantation, HP rates using different published classifications, and speech perception scores. RESULTS: Fifty ears for 47 patients (mean age, 58.2 yr; range, 23-86) were implanted with the electrode. Recognizing that not all patients were true HP candidates and/or underwent generally accepted HP surgical techniques, 39 ears had preoperative low-frequency hearing (audiometric threshold ≤ 85dB HL at 250Hz), 24 preserved acoustic hearing postoperatively (75.0%). Patients who had preserved acoustic hearing were implanted via round window (N = 18), extended round window (N = 4), or via cochleostomy (N = 2) approaches. Mean threshold elevation for low-frequency pure-tone average (125, 250, and 500 Hz) was 20.2 dB after surgery. 43.8% of patients had aidable low-frequency hearing at activation, 30.0% at 6-months postoperatively, and 30.8% 1-year postopera tively. Using a formula outlined by Skarzynski and colleagues, at 6-months postoperatively, 15.0% of patients had complete HP, whereas 40.0% had partial HP. At 1-year, these percentages decreased to 0% and 38.5%, respectively. Age, type of approach, and perioperative steroid use were not correlated with HP outcomes at activation and 6-months postoperatively (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The mid-scala electrode evaluated allows preservation of low-frequency hearing in patients undergoing cochlear implantation at rates and degrees of preservation close to other reports in the cochlear implant literature.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate hearing preservation (HP) outcomes in adult cochlear implant recipients with a mid-scala electrode. SETTING: Tertiary academic center. PATIENTS: Adult patients implanted with a mid-scala electrode between May 2013 and July 2015. INTERVENTIONS: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Age, sex, surgical approach, residual hearing changes post cochlear implantation, HP rates using different published classifications, and speech perception scores. RESULTS: Fifty ears for 47 patients (mean age, 58.2 yr; range, 23-86) were implanted with the electrode. Recognizing that not allpatients were true HP candidates and/or underwent generally accepted HP surgical techniques, 39 ears had preoperative low-frequency hearing (audiometric threshold ≤ 85dB HL at 250Hz), 24 preserved acoustic hearing postoperatively (75.0%). Patients who had preserved acoustic hearing were implanted via round window (N = 18), extended round window (N = 4), or via cochleostomy (N = 2) approaches. Mean threshold elevation for low-frequency pure-tone average (125, 250, and 500 Hz) was 20.2 dB after surgery. 43.8% of patients had aidable low-frequency hearing at activation, 30.0% at 6-months postoperatively, and 30.8% 1-year postopera tively. Using a formula outlined by Skarzynski and colleagues, at 6-months postoperatively, 15.0% of patients had complete HP, whereas 40.0% had partial HP. At 1-year, these percentages decreased to 0% and 38.5%, respectively. Age, type of approach, and perioperative steroid use were not correlated with HP outcomes at activation and 6-months postoperatively (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The mid-scala electrode evaluated allows preservation of low-frequency hearing in patients undergoing cochlear implantation at rates and degrees of preservation close to other reports in the cochlear implant literature.
Authors: Paul Mick; Hosam Amoodi; David Shipp; Lendra Friesen; Sean Symons; Vincent Lin; Julian Nedzelski; Joseph Chen Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: George B Wanna; Jack H Noble; Matthew L Carlson; René H Gifford; Mary S Dietrich; David S Haynes; Benoit M Dawant; Robert F Labadie Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2014-05-30 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Chris James; Klaus Albegger; Rolf Battmer; Sandro Burdo; Naima Deggouj; Olivier Deguine; Norbert Dillier; Michel Gersdorff; Roland Laszig; Thomas Lenarz; Manuel Manrique Rodriguez; Michel Mondain; Erwin Offeciers; Angel Ramos Macías; Richard Ramsden; Olivier Sterkers; Ernst Von Wallenberg; Benno Weber; Bernard Fraysse Journal: Acta Otolaryngol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 1.494
Authors: Matthew L Carlson; Colin L W Driscoll; René H Gifford; Geoffrey J Service; Nicole M Tombers; Becky J Hughes-Borst; Brian A Neff; Charles W Beatty Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Marie-Charlot Jurawitz; Andreas Büchner; Theo Harpel; Mark Schüssler; Omid Majdani; Anke Lesinski-Schiedat; Thomas Lenarz Journal: Audiol Neurootol Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 1.854
Authors: Wolfgang K Gstoettner; Paul Van de Heyning; Alec Fitzgerald O'Connor; Jan Kiefer; Constantino Morera; Manuel Sainz; Katrien Vermeire; Sonelle McDonald; Laura Cavallé; Juan García Valdecasas; Oliver F Adunka; Uwe Baumann; Andrea Kleine-Punte; Hanna Brockmeier; Ilona Anderson; Silke Helbig Journal: ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 1.538
Authors: Ashley M Nassiri; Robert J Yawn; René H Gifford; David S Haynes; Jillian B Roberts; Max S Gilbane; Jack Murfee; Marc L Bennett Journal: J Am Acad Audiol Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 1.664
Authors: Rachel A Scheperle; Viral D Tejani; Julia K Omtvedt; Carolyn J Brown; Paul J Abbas; Marlan R Hansen; Bruce J Gantz; Jacob J Oleson; Marie V Ozanne Journal: Hear Res Date: 2017-04-12 Impact factor: 3.208
Authors: Elizabeth L Perkins; Nauman F Manzoor; David S Haynes; Matthew O'Malley; René Gifford; Alejandro Rivas Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Ashley M Nassiri; Robert J Yawn; Jourdan T Holder; Robert T Dwyer; Matthew R O'Malley; Marc L Bennett; Robert F Labadie; Alejandro Rivas Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 2.619
Authors: Elizabeth Perkins; Jaclyn Lee; Nauman Manzoor; Matthew O'Malley; Marc Bennett; Robert Labadie; Alejandro Rivas; David Haynes; René Gifford Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 2.311