OBJECTIVE: Evaluate performance and quality of life changes after sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in patients with preoperative residual hearing functioning in a bimodal hearing configuration. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using within-subjects repeated measures design. SETTING: Tertiary otologic center. PATIENTS: Twenty-two adult patients with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who used bimodal hearing before second cochlear implant (CI) meeting the following criteria: 1) preoperative residual hearing (≤80 dB HL at 250 Hz) in the ear to be implanted, 2) implantation with current CI technology (2013-2016), 3) consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) speech recognition testing in the bimodal condition preoperatively and bilateral CI condition postoperatively. INTERVENTION: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CNC and AzBio sentence scores in quiet and noise (+5 SNR). Subjective measures of communication difficulty and sound quality were also administered. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (mean 64 yr, 68% men) were included. At an average follow-up of 11.8 months, CNC scores in the bilateral CI condition (mean 63%, standard deviation [SD] = 22) were significantly better than preoperative bimodal scores with repeated measures analysis (mean 55%, SD = 22) (p = 0.03). AzBio scores in quiet were also higher with bilateral CI (mean 76%, SD = 24) compared with bimodal listening (mean 69%, SD = 29) (p = 0.0007). Global abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB) and overall speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing (SSQ) scores exhibited significant improvement following bilateral implantation (p = 0.006 for both analyses). CONCLUSIONS: For patients using a bimodal hearing configuration with substantial residual hearing in the non-CI ear, bilateral cochlear implantation yields improved audiologic performance and better subjective quality of life, irrespective of the ability to preserve acoustic hearing during the second sided implantation.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate performance and quality of life changes after sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in patients with preoperative residual hearing functioning in a bimodal hearing configuration. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis using within-subjects repeated measures design. SETTING: Tertiary otologic center. PATIENTS: Twenty-two adult patients with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who used bimodal hearing before second cochlear implant (CI) meeting the following criteria: 1) preoperative residual hearing (≤80 dB HL at 250 Hz) in the ear to be implanted, 2) implantation with current CI technology (2013-2016), 3) consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) speech recognition testing in the bimodal condition preoperatively and bilateral CI condition postoperatively. INTERVENTION: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CNC and AzBio sentence scores in quiet and noise (+5 SNR). Subjective measures of communication difficulty and sound quality were also administered. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (mean 64 yr, 68% men) were included. At an average follow-up of 11.8 months, CNC scores in the bilateral CI condition (mean 63%, standard deviation [SD] = 22) were significantly better than preoperative bimodal scores with repeated measures analysis (mean 55%, SD = 22) (p = 0.03). AzBio scores in quiet were also higher with bilateral CI (mean 76%, SD = 24) compared with bimodal listening (mean 69%, SD = 29) (p = 0.0007). Global abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB) and overall speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing (SSQ) scores exhibited significant improvement following bilateral implantation (p = 0.006 for both analyses). CONCLUSIONS: For patients using a bimodal hearing configuration with substantial residual hearing in the non-CI ear, bilateral cochlear implantation yields improved audiologic performance and better subjective quality of life, irrespective of the ability to preserve acoustic hearing during the second sided implantation.
Authors: Anthony J Spahr; Michael F Dorman; Leonid M Litvak; Susan Van Wie; Rene H Gifford; Philipos C Loizou; Louise M Loiselle; Tyler Oakes; Sarah Cook Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2012 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: Peter J Blamey; Bert Maat; Deniz Başkent; Deborah Mawman; Elaine Burke; Norbert Dillier; Andy Beynon; Andrea Kleine-Punte; Paul J Govaerts; Piotr H Skarzynski; Alexander M Huber; Françoise Sterkers-Artières; Paul Van de Heyning; Stephen O'Leary; Bernard Fraysse; Kevin Green; Olivier Sterkers; Frédéric Venail; Henryk Skarzynski; Christophe Vincent; Eric Truy; Richard Dowell; François Bergeron; Diane S Lazard Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: René H Gifford; Colin L W Driscoll; Timothy J Davis; Pam Fiebig; Alan Micco; Michael F Dorman Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Jan Löhler; Mario Cebulla; Wafaa Shehata-Dieler; Stefan Volkenstein; Christiane Völter; Leif Erik Walther Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2019-04-26 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Theodore R McRackan; Brittany N Hand; Craig A Velozo; Judy R Dubno Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Elke M J Devocht; A Miranda L Janssen; Josef Chalupper; Robert J Stokroos; Herman Kingma; Erwin L J George Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 3.240