Purpose: Whether, and if so when, a second-ear cochlear implant should be provided to older, unilaterally implanted children is an ongoing clinical question. This study evaluated rate of speech recognition progress for the second implanted ear and with bilateral cochlear implants in older sequentially implanted children and evaluated localization abilities. Method: A prospective longitudinal study included 24 bilaterally implanted children (mean ear surgeries at 5.11 and 14.25 years). Test intervals were every 3-6 months through 24 months postbilateral. Test conditions were each ear and bilaterally for speech recognition and localization. Results: Overall, the rate of progress for the second implanted ear was gradual. Improvements in quiet continued through the second year of bilateral use. Improvements in noise were more modest and leveled off during the second year. On all measures, results from the second ear were poorer than the first. Bilateral scores were better than either ear alone for all measures except sentences in quiet and localization. Conclusions: Older sequentially implanted children with several years between surgeries may obtain speech understanding in the second implanted ear; however, performance may be limited and rate of progress gradual. Continued contralateral ear hearing aid use and reduced time between surgeries may enhance outcomes.
Purpose: Whether, and if so when, a second-ear cochlear implant should be provided to older, unilaterally implanted children is an ongoing clinical question. This study evaluated rate of speech recognition progress for the second implanted ear and with bilateral cochlear implants in older sequentially implanted children and evaluated localization abilities. Method: A prospective longitudinal study included 24 bilaterally implanted children (mean ear surgeries at 5.11 and 14.25 years). Test intervals were every 3-6 months through 24 months postbilateral. Test conditions were each ear and bilaterally for speech recognition and localization. Results: Overall, the rate of progress for the second implanted ear was gradual. Improvements in quiet continued through the second year of bilateral use. Improvements in noise were more modest and leveled off during the second year. On all measures, results from the second ear were poorer than the first. Bilateral scores were better than either ear alone for all measures except sentences in quiet and localization. Conclusions: Older sequentially implanted children with several years between surgeries may obtain speech understanding in the second implanted ear; however, performance may be limited and rate of progress gradual. Continued contralateral ear hearing aid use and reduced time between surgeries may enhance outcomes.
Authors: Filip Asp; Elina Mäki-Torkko; Eva Karltorp; Henrik Harder; Leif Hergils; Gunnar Eskilsson; Stefan Stenfelt Journal: Int J Audiol Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 2.117
Authors: Camille C Dunn; Elizabeth A Walker; Stephanie Gogel; Tanya Van Voorst; Marlan Hansen; Bruce J Gantz Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Sara M Misurelli; Matthew J Goupell; Emily A Burg; Rachael Jocewicz; Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2020 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.293
Authors: Gabriela Felix Lazarini Almeida; Marcella Ferrari Martins; Lucas Bevilacqua Alves da Costa; Orozimbo Alves da Costa; Ana Claudia Martinho de Carvalho Journal: Braz J Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2018-08-18