Jane Rose1, Julie A Muskett1, Kelly A King1, Christopher K Zalewski1, Parna Chattaraj1, John A Butman2, Margaret A Kenna3,4, Wade W Chien5, Carmen C Brewer1, Andrew J Griffith1. 1. Otolaryngology Branch, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 2. Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 3. Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Enhancement, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Office of the Clinical Director, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To characterize the severity and natural history of hearing loss, and the prevalence of having a cochlear implant in a maturing cohort of individuals with enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) and zero or one mutant allele of SLC26A4. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of subjects ascertained between 1998 and 2015 at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. METHODS: Study subjects were 127 individuals (median age, 8 years; range, 0-59 years) with EVA in at least one ear. RESULTS: Ears with EVA and zero or one mutant allele of SLC26A4 had mean 0.5/1/2/4-kHz pure-tone averages of 62.6 and 52.9 dB HL, respectively, in contrast to EVA ears with two mutant alleles of SLC26A4 (88.1 dB HL; P < .01). This association was independent of age, sex, or side of EVA (P < .001). Natural history of hearing loss was not associated with number of mutant alleles (P = .94). The prevalence of having a cochlear implant was nine (12%) of 76, two (13%) of 15, and 12 (38%) of 32 subjects with zero, one, and two mutant alleles, respectively (P = .00833). This association was not independent (P = .534) but reflected underlying correlations with age at time of first audiogram (P = .003) or severity of hearing loss (P = .000). CONCLUSIONS: Ears with EVA and zero or one mutant allele of SLC26A4 have less severe hearing loss, no difference in prevalence of fluctuation, and a lower prevalence of cochlear implantation in comparison to ears with two mutant alleles of SLC26A4. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 127:E238-E243, 2017.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To characterize the severity and natural history of hearing loss, and the prevalence of having a cochlear implant in a maturing cohort of individuals with enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) and zero or one mutant allele of SLC26A4. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of subjects ascertained between 1998 and 2015 at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. METHODS: Study subjects were 127 individuals (median age, 8 years; range, 0-59 years) with EVA in at least one ear. RESULTS: Ears with EVA and zero or one mutant allele of SLC26A4 had mean 0.5/1/2/4-kHz pure-tone averages of 62.6 and 52.9 dB HL, respectively, in contrast to EVA ears with two mutant alleles of SLC26A4 (88.1 dB HL; P < .01). This association was independent of age, sex, or side of EVA (P < .001). Natural history of hearing loss was not associated with number of mutant alleles (P = .94). The prevalence of having a cochlear implant was nine (12%) of 76, two (13%) of 15, and 12 (38%) of 32 subjects with zero, one, and two mutant alleles, respectively (P = .00833). This association was not independent (P = .534) but reflected underlying correlations with age at time of first audiogram (P = .003) or severity of hearing loss (P = .000). CONCLUSIONS: Ears with EVA and zero or one mutant allele of SLC26A4 have less severe hearing loss, no difference in prevalence of fluctuation, and a lower prevalence of cochlear implantation in comparison to ears with two mutant alleles of SLC26A4. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 127:E238-E243, 2017.
Authors: Julie A Muskett; Parna Chattaraj; John F Heneghan; Fabian R Reimold; Boris E Shmukler; Carmen C Brewer; Kelly A King; Christopher K Zalewski; Thomas H Shawker; John A Butman; Margaret A Kenna; Wade W Chien; Seth L Alper; Andrew J Griffith Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Richard K Gurgel; Robert K Jackler; Robert A Dobie; Gerald R Popelka Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2012-08-29 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Parna Chattaraj; Fabian R Reimold; Julie A Muskett; Boris E Shmukler; Wade W Chien; Anne C Madeo; Shannon P Pryor; Christopher K Zalewski; John A Butman; Carmen C Brewer; Margaret A Kenna; Seth L Alper; Andrew J Griffith Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: S P Pryor; A C Madeo; J C Reynolds; N J Sarlis; K S Arnos; W E Nance; Y Yang; C K Zalewski; C C Brewer; J A Butman; A J Griffith Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: B Y Choi; A C Madeo; K A King; C K Zalewski; S P Pryor; J A Muskett; W E Nance; J A Butman; C C Brewer; A J Griffith Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2009-07-02 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Byung Yoon Choi; Andrew K Stewart; Anne C Madeo; Shannon P Pryor; Suzanne Lenhard; Rick Kittles; David Eisenman; H Jeffrey Kim; John Niparko; James Thomsen; Kathleen S Arnos; Walter E Nance; Kelly A King; Christopher K Zalewski; Carmen C Brewer; Thomas Shawker; James C Reynolds; John A Butman; Lawrence P Karniski; Seth L Alper; Andrew J Griffith Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Hela Azaiez; Tao Yang; Sai Prasad; Jessica L Sorensen; Carla J Nishimura; William J Kimberling; Richard J H Smith Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2007-08-10 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Parna Chattaraj; Tina Munjal; Keiji Honda; Nanna D Rendtorff; Jessica S Ratay; Julie A Muskett; Davide S Risso; Isabelle Roux; E Michael Gertz; Alejandro A Schäffer; Thomas B Friedman; Robert J Morell; Lisbeth Tranebjærg; Andrew J Griffith Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2017-08-05 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Janet R Chao; Parna Chattaraj; Tina Munjal; Keiji Honda; Kelly A King; Christopher K Zalewski; Wade W Chien; Carmen C Brewer; Andrew J Griffith Journal: BMC Med Genet Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 2.103