Kavita Dedhia1, Tina Worman, Margaret A Meredith, Jay T Rubinstein. 1. *Department of Otolaryngology, University of Washington Medical Center †Department of Otolaryngology, Seattle Children's Hospital ‡Virginia Merrill Bloedel Hearing Research Center §Department of Audiology, University of Washington Medical Center ||Department of Pediatric Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, Washington, U.S.A.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe patterns of hearing loss in patients with low-frequency residual hearing after cochlear implantation. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Cochlear implant candidates with immediate postoperative residual low-frequency hearing. INTERVENTIONS: Hybrid or traditional cochlear implant. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Audiograms to measure postoperative hearing. RESULTS: Of the 166 patients reviewed, 17 ears met the inclusion criteria. The age ranged from 3 years 2 months to 86 years. Etiology was unknown (n = 6), presbycusis (n = 5), genetic (n = 4), acoustic trauma (n = 1), and measles virus (n = 1). The Nucleus Hybrid S8 and S12 (n = 7) was the most common electrode array, and then Nucleus 422 (n = 6), Nucleus Contour Advance (n = 2), Med-El Flex 28 (n = 2), and Advanced Bionics Mid Scala (n = 1). Cochleostomy was performed in nine, and round window approach in nine patients. Average follow-up was 28 months (2-68 mo). Postoperative loss was mixed in eight and purely sensorineural in eight. The most common patterns of hearing loss were gradual decline (n = 7), and then fluctuating hearing (n = 6), stable (n = 3), and sudden loss (n = 1). One patient only had one postoperative audiogram. CONCLUSION: Some long-term hearing preservation was achieved in 94% of patients with immediate postoperative hearing preservation. Patients developed both mixed and sensorineural loss postoperatively. A majority of patients with mixed hearing loss had a supra-preoperative bone curve. Gradual decline and fluctuating hearing loss were the most common patterns of hearing loss; few patients had stable hearing and one had a sudden loss.
OBJECTIVE: To describe patterns of hearing loss in patients with low-frequency residual hearing after cochlear implantation. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Cochlear implant candidates with immediate postoperative residual low-frequency hearing. INTERVENTIONS: Hybrid or traditional cochlear implant. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Audiograms to measure postoperative hearing. RESULTS: Of the 166 patients reviewed, 17 ears met the inclusion criteria. The age ranged from 3 years 2 months to 86 years. Etiology was unknown (n = 6), presbycusis (n = 5), genetic (n = 4), acoustic trauma (n = 1), and measles virus (n = 1). The Nucleus Hybrid S8 and S12 (n = 7) was the most common electrode array, and then Nucleus 422 (n = 6), Nucleus Contour Advance (n = 2), Med-El Flex 28 (n = 2), and Advanced Bionics Mid Scala (n = 1). Cochleostomy was performed in nine, and round window approach in nine patients. Average follow-up was 28 months (2-68 mo). Postoperative loss was mixed in eight and purely sensorineural in eight. The most common patterns of hearing loss were gradual decline (n = 7), and then fluctuating hearing (n = 6), stable (n = 3), and sudden loss (n = 1). One patient only had one postoperative audiogram. CONCLUSION: Some long-term hearing preservation was achieved in 94% of patients with immediate postoperative hearing preservation. Patients developed both mixed and sensorineural loss postoperatively. A majority of patients with mixed hearing loss had a supra-preoperative bone curve. Gradual decline and fluctuating hearing loss were the most common patterns of hearing loss; few patients had stable hearing and one had a sudden loss.
Authors: George B Wanna; Brendan P O'Connell; David O Francis; Rene H Gifford; Jacob B Hunter; Jourdan T Holder; Marc L Bennett; Alejandro Rivas; Robert F Labadie; David S Haynes Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Brendan P O'Connell; Jourdan T Holder; Robert T Dwyer; René H Gifford; Jack H Noble; Marc L Bennett; Alejandro Rivas; George B Wanna; David S Haynes; Robert F Labadie Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2017-05-29 Impact factor: 4.677