Literature DB >> 29855691

P1 cortical auditory evoked potential in children with unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants; implication for the timing of second cochlear implantation.

Sung Wook Jeong1, Seung Hyun Chung1, Lee-Suk Kim2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine maturation of the central auditory pathway, using P1 cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP), in children who had received unilateral or bilateral cochlear implantation (CI). STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective study.
SETTING: Tertiary referral hospital.
METHODS: Twenty children who had received CI due to congenital, or prelingual, deafness participated in the study. Participants had received the 1st implant at a mean age of 3.4 ± 0.7 years; 16 had also received a 2nd CI for the contralateral ear, at a mean age of 11.1 ± 2.1 years. P1 CAEP was recorded while using the 1st implant and, for those who received contralateral CI, within 2 weeks of switching on the 2nd implant. Relations between P1 latency and duration with the 1st implant, and between age at 1st CI and P1 latency, were investigated. Relations between P1 latency with the 1st and 2nd implants, and between the interstage interval and difference between P1 latencies with the 1st and 2nd implants, were also examined.
RESULTS: P1 CAEP with the 1st implant was present in 16 of the 20 children. Mean P1 latency was shorter in the early CI group compared with the late CI group, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.154). There was a significant negative correlation between the duration with the 1st implant and P1 latency (r = - 0.783, p < 0.001). Among the 16 children with sequential bilateral CI, P1 CAEP with the 2nd implant was present in 10. There was a significant negative correlation between the duration with the 1st implant before receiving the 2nd implant and P1 latency with the 2nd implant (r = - 0.710, p = 0.021); there was also a significant positive correlation between P1 latency with the 1st and 2nd implants (r = 0.722, p = 0.018). There was not a significant correlation between interstage interval and the difference between the two P1 latencies (r = - 0.430, p = 0.248).
CONCLUSION: Longer cochlear implant use is associated with shorter P1 latency. Unilateral hearing with the 1st implant may positively affect P1 latency with the 2nd CI ear. These findings imply that increased auditory experience may influence central auditory pathway maturation and that the degree of central auditory pathway maturation before the 2nd CI, rather than the timing when the surgery is received, may influence 2nd CI outcome in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Central auditory pathway; Child; Cochlear implants; Cortical auditory evoked potential

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29855691     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-018-5021-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  24 in total

1.  Comparison of bilateral and unilateral cochlear implants in children with sequential surgery.

Authors:  Henrik Strøm-Roum; Claude Laurent; Ona B Wie
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 1.675

2.  Functional benefits of sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children with long inter-stage interval between two implants.

Authors:  Jeong-Seo Kim; Lee-Suk Kim; Sung-Wook Jeong
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2012-11-06       Impact factor: 1.675

3.  A sensitive period for the development of the central auditory system in children with cochlear implants: implications for age of implantation.

Authors:  Anu Sharma; Michael F Dorman; Anthony J Spahr
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Central auditory development: evidence from CAEP measurements in children fit with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Anu Sharma; Phillip Gilley; Kathryn Martin; Peter Roland
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 2.288

5.  Preoperative differences of cerebral metabolism relate to the outcome of cochlear implants in congenitally deaf children.

Authors:  Hyo Jeong Lee; Eunjoo Kang; Seung-Ha Oh; Hyejin Kang; Dong Soo Lee; Myung Chul Lee; Chong-Sun Kim
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Language of early- and later-identified children with hearing loss.

Authors:  C Yoshinaga-Itano; A L Sedey; D K Coulter; A L Mehl
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Spoken language benefits of extending cochlear implant candidacy below 12 months of age.

Authors:  Johanna G Nicholas; Ann E Geers
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.311

8.  The effect of interdevice interval on speech perception performance among bilateral, pediatric cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Pelin Kocdor; Claire E Iseli; Holly F Teagle; Jennifer Woodard; Lisa Park; Carlton J Zdanski; Kevin D Brown; Oliver F Adunka; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 3.325

9.  Rapid development of cortical auditory evoked potentials after early cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Anu Sharma; Michael F Dorman; Anthony J Spahr
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2002-07-19       Impact factor: 1.837

Review 10.  Cross-Modal Re-Organization in Clinical Populations with Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Anu Sharma; Hannah Glick
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2016-01-26
View more
  2 in total

1.  The Role of the P1 Latency in Auditory and Speech Performance Evaluation in Cochlear Implanted Children.

Authors:  Shan Xiong; Liwei Jiang; Yu Wang; Tao Pan; Furong Ma
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 3.599

2.  Cortical Auditory Evoked Potential in Adults With Cochlear Implants: A Comparison With Adults With Normal Hearing.

Authors:  Seong-Hyun Boo; Sung Wook Jeong
Journal:  J Audiol Otol       Date:  2021-11-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.