Literature DB >> 36075098

Further Evidence for Individual Ear Consideration in Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation.

Ankita Patro1, Nathan R Lindquist1, Jourdan T Holder2, Kareem O Tawfik1, Matthew R O'Malley1, Marc L Bennett1, David S Haynes1, René Gifford2, Elizabeth L Perkins1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report speech outcomes after cochlear implantation (CI) for asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) and assess the influence of contralateral hearing. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective review.
SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: One hundred eighty-eight adults (mean age, 70 yr) undergoing CI for AHL from 2015 to 2020. Candidacy included pure-tone average (PTA) at least 70 dB hearing level and AzBio in quiet 60% or less in the implanted ear and AzBio in quiet greater than 40% in the contralateral ear. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: PTA; Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word, AzBio sentences scores; Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ).
RESULTS: Mean preoperative PTA and AzBio in the implanted and contralateral ears were 85.2 and 68.1 dB hearing level and 24.7% and 69.2%, respectively. Mean CNC in the implanted ear increased from 18.3% preoperatively to 44.4% ( p < 0.0001) at 6 months and 49.3% ( p < 0.0001) at 12 months. Mean AzBio in the implanted ear improved from 24.7% preoperatively to 60.3% ( p < 0.0001) at 6 months and 64.3% ( p < 0.0001) at 12 months. Patients demonstrated significant improvement in all SSQ domains at 6 and 12 months. When comparing patients with preoperative contralateral AzBio greater than 60% versus 41% to 60%, no significant differences existed in postoperative CNC scores (6-mo: 47% versus 41%, p = 0.276; 12-mo: 51% versus 47%, p = 0.543). There were no significant differences in 6-month ( p = 0.936) or 12-month ( p = 0.792) CNC scores between patients with AHL (contralateral ear AzBio >40%) and 169 unilateral CI patients meeting the traditional Medicare criteria (contralateral ear AzBio ≤40%).
CONCLUSION: CI recipients with AHL derive significant speech improvements, supporting individual ear consideration for CI candidacy and patient benefit outside of current Medicare criteria.
Copyright © 2022, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36075098      PMCID: PMC9481725          DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003677

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.619


  44 in total

1.  Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Benefits of Bimodal Stimulation.

Authors:  Maarten Caspar van Loon; Cas Smits; Conrad F Smit; Erik F Hensen; Paul Merkus
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.311

2.  Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Speech Recognition in Quiet and in Noise, and Health Related Quality of Life.

Authors:  Douglas P Sladen; Matthew L Carlson; Brittany P Dowling; Amy P Olund; Melissa D DeJong; Alyce Breneman; Sara Hollander; Charles W Beatty; Brian A Neff; Colin L Driscoll
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.311

3.  Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life in Adults with Unilateral Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Margaret T Dillon; Emily Buss; Meredith A Rooth; English R King; Ellen J Deres; Craig A Buchman; Harold C Pillsbury; Kevin D Brown
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  Binaural localization.

Authors:  J Blauert
Journal:  Scand Audiol Suppl       Date:  1982

5.  Speech-discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable.

Authors:  A R Thornton; M J Raffin
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1978-09

6.  Development and validation of the AzBio sentence lists.

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

7.  Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Laura K Holden; Charles C Finley; Jill B Firszt; Timothy A Holden; Christine Brenner; Lisa G Potts; Brenda D Gotter; Sallie S Vanderhoof; Karen Mispagel; Gitry Heydebrand; Margaret W Skinner
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Evidence for the expansion of adult cochlear implant candidacy.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Michael F Dorman; Jon K Shallop; Sarah A Sydlowski
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Effects of Cochlear Implantation on Binaural Hearing in Adults With Unilateral Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Emily Buss; Margaret T Dillon; Meredith A Rooth; English R King; Ellen J Deres; Craig A Buchman; Harold C Pillsbury; Kevin D Brown
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

Review 10.  Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults: Limitations, Expansions, and Opportunities for Improvement.

Authors:  Teresa A Zwolan; Gregory Basura
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2021-12-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.