Evaluation of bilaterally implanted adult subjects with the nucleus 24 cochlear implant systems

被引:84
|
作者
Ramsden, R
Greenham, P
O'Driscoll, M
Mawman, D
Proops, D
Craddock, L
Fielden, C
Graham, J
Meerton, L
Verschuur, C
Toner, J
McAnallen, T
Osborne, J
Doran, M
Gray, R
Pickerill, M
机构
[1] Manchester Royal Infirm, Manchester M13 9WL, Lancs, England
[2] Cochlear Europe Ltd, London, England
[3] Midlands Cochlear Implant Proramme, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[4] UCL, Nuffield Cochlear Implant Programme, London, England
[5] S England Cochlear Implant Programme, Southampton, Hants, England
[6] Belfast Cochlear Implant Programme, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland
[7] N Wales Cochlear Implant Programme, Glan Clwyd, Wales
[8] Cambridge Cochlear Implant Programme, Cambridge, England
关键词
cochlear implants; bilateral; nucleus; 24; adults; speech perception;
D O I
10.1097/01.mao.0000185075.58199.22
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the speech perception benefits of bilateral implantation for subjects who already have one implant. Study Design: Repeated measures. Patients: Thirty adult cochlear implant users who received their second implant from 1 to 7 years with a mean of 3 years after their first device. Ages ranged from 29 to 82 years with a mean of 57 years. Setting: Tertiary referral centers across the United Kingdom. Main Outcome Measures: Monosyllabic consonant-nucleus-consonant words and City University of New York sentences in quiet with coincident speech and noise and with the noise spatially separated from the speech by +/- 90. Results: At 9 months, results showed the second ear in noise was 13.9 +/- 5.9% worse than the first ear (p < 0.001); a significant binaural advantage of 12.6 +/- 5.4% (p < 0.001) over the first ear alone for speech and noise from the front; a 21 6% (p < 0.001) binaural advantage over the first ear alone when noise was ipsilateral to the first ear; no binaural advantage when noise was contralateral to the first ear. Conclusions: There is a significant bilateral advantage of adding a second ear for this group. We were unable to predict when the second ear would be the better performing ear, and by implanting both ears, we guarantee implanting the better ear. Sequential implantation with long delays between ears has resulted in poor second ear performance for some subjects and has limited the degree of bilateral benefit that can be obtained by these users. The dual microphone does not provide equivalent benefit to bilateral implants.
引用
收藏
页码:988 / 998
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Considerations for a Revised Adult Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation Protocol
    Biever, Allison
    Amurao, Carly
    Mears, Megan
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2021, 42 (01) : 159 - 164
  • [22] Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems
    Firszt, JB
    Holden, LK
    Skinner, MW
    Tobey, EA
    Peterson, A
    Gaggl, W
    Runge-Samuelson, CL
    Wackym, PA
    EAR AND HEARING, 2004, 25 (04): : 375 - 387
  • [23] Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects
    Zwolan, TA
    Collins, LM
    Wakefield, GH
    JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1997, 102 (06): : 3673 - 3685
  • [24] SUBJECTIVE BENEFITS REPORTED BY ADULT NUCLEUS 22-CHANNEL COCHLEAR IMPLANT USERS
    KOU, BS
    SHIPP, DB
    NEDZELSKI, JM
    JOURNAL OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 1994, 23 (01): : 8 - 14
  • [25] PERFORMANCE OF ADULT INERAID AND NUCLEUS COCHLEAR IMPLANT PATIENTS AFTER 3.5 YEARS OF USE
    TYLER, RS
    LOWDER, MW
    PARKINSON, AJ
    WOODWORTH, GG
    GANTZ, BJ
    AUDIOLOGY, 1995, 34 (03): : 135 - 144
  • [26] European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant
    Lenarz, Thomas
    James, Chris
    Cuda, Domenico
    O'Connor, Alec Fitzgerald
    Frachet, Bruno
    Frijns, Johan H. M.
    Klenzner, Thomas
    Laszig, Roland
    Manrique, Manuel
    Marx, Mathieu
    Merkus, Paul
    Mylanus, Emmanuel A. M.
    Offeciers, Erwin
    Pesch, Joerg
    Ramos-Macias, Angel
    Robier, Alain
    Sterkers, Olivier
    Uziel, Alain
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2013, 52 (12) : 838 - 848
  • [27] Evaluation of streamlined programming procedures for the nucleus cochlear implant with the contour electrode array
    Plant, K
    Law, MA
    Whitford, L
    Knight, M
    Tari, S
    Leigh, J
    Pedley, K
    Nel, E
    EAR AND HEARING, 2005, 26 (06): : 651 - 668
  • [28] Comparison of EAP thresholds with MAP levels in the nucleus 24 cochlear implant: Data from children
    Hughes, ML
    Brown, CJ
    Abbas, PJ
    Wolaver, AA
    Gervais, JP
    EAR AND HEARING, 2000, 21 (02): : 164 - 174
  • [29] From Nucleus 24 to 513: Changing Cochlear Implant Design Affects Auditory Response Thresholds
    Gordon, Karen A.
    Papsin, Blake C.
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2013, 34 (03) : 436 - 442
  • [30] Preliminary experience with neural response telemetry in the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant
    Brown, CJ
    Abbas, PJ
    Gantz, BJ
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY, 1998, 19 (03): : 320 - 327