Evaluation of Objective Test Techniques in Cochlear Implant Users With Inner Ear Malformations

被引:23
|
作者
Cinar, Betul Cicek [1 ]
Atas, Ahmet [2 ,3 ]
Sennaroglu, Gonca [2 ,3 ]
Sennaroglu, Levent [3 ]
机构
[1] Meders Med, Ankara, Turkey
[2] Hacettepe Univ, Audiol & Speech Pathol Unit, Ankara, Turkey
[3] Hacettepe Univ, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Ankara, Turkey
关键词
Audiologic findings; Cochlear implant; Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response; Electrically evoked compound action potentials; Electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold; Inner ear malformations; Objective test techniques; CHILDREN; CLASSIFICATION;
D O I
10.1097/MAO.0b013e318229d4af
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: The aim of the study was to compare results of objective test techniques in cochlear implant users with inner ear malformations and incomplete partition anomalies with types I and II and to show which techniques should be used in the evaluation and fitting of cochlear implant users with inner ear malformations. Study Design: Retrospective clinical study. Patients: The subjects in the control group were selected randomly from cochlear implant users with normal cochlea. Inclusion criteria for patients group were having inner ear malformation for the study group and at least 1 year cochlear implants use for both groups. Interventions: For each individual subject, electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs), electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold (ESRT), and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (EABR) thresholds were determined. These tests were applied after a normal cochlear implant fitting session. There were 20 subjects in inner ear malformation group and 15 subjects in the control group. For each subject, 6 intracochlear electrodes, representing apical, middle, and basal array of intracochlear electrode, were used. Outcomes: In the cochlear malformation group, percentage of acquired ECAP thresholds was 25%. However, in the control group, percentage of ECAP was 74%. Similarly with ECAP, percentage of ESRT in the cochlear malformation group was 17.5%, and that in the control group was 90%. The difference between these percentages was statistically significant. Both current levels and latencies of EABR wave V were significantly different from each other for the inner ear malformation group and the control group. Results: For statistical analysis, Mann-Whitney U test for 2 independent samples, Kruskal-Wallis analysis and Dunn's Z test were used. Conclusion: For the inner ear malformation group, EABR is a more applicable objective test technique when compared with ECAP and ESRT.
引用
收藏
页码:1065 / 1074
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Changes of Otolith and Balance Function Related to Cochlear Implant in Hearing Loss With Inner Ear Malformations Children
    Shen, Mengya
    Xue, Shujin
    Wei, Xingmei
    Chen, Biao
    Kong, Ying
    Li, Yongxin
    CLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2025, 50 (01) : 113 - 121
  • [22] Kochleaimplantat bei InnenohrfehlbildungenCochlear implant for malformations of the inner ear
    A. Aschendorff
    R. Laszig
    W. Maier
    R. Beck
    C. Schild
    R. Birkenhäger
    T. Wesarg
    S. Kröger
    S. Arndt
    HNO, 2009, 57 : 533 - 541
  • [23] Systematic review of cochlear implantation in patients with inner ear malformations
    Shah, Sunny
    Walters, Rameen
    Langlie, Jake
    Davies, Camron
    Finberg, Ariel
    Tuset, Maria-Pia
    Ebode, Dario
    Mittal, Rahul
    Eshraghi, Adrien A.
    PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (10):
  • [24] Cochlear nerve visualization in Normal anatomy and inner ear malformations
    Assiri, Majed
    Khurayzi, Tawfiq
    Almuhawas, Fida
    Schlemmer, Kurt
    Hagr, Abdulrahman
    Dhanasingh, Anandhan
    LARYNGOSCOPE INVESTIGATIVE OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2024, 9 (06):
  • [25] Outcomes of cochlear implantation in children with and without inner ear malformations
    Celik, Mustafa
    Karatas, Erkan
    Kanlikama, Muzaffer
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2018, 34 (02) : 380 - 384
  • [26] Cochlear implantation in congenital middle and inner ear malformations in children
    Skarzynski, H.
    Porowski, M.
    Mrowka, M.
    Barylyak, R.
    Szkielkowska, A.
    Mlotkowka-Klimek, P.
    Skarzynski, P. H.
    10TH EUROPEAN SYMPOSIUM ON PAEDIATRIC COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION, 2011, : 93 - 95
  • [27] Histopathology of Inner Ear Malformations: Potential Pitfalls for Cochlear Implantation
    Monsanto, Rafael da Costa
    Sennaroglu, Levent
    Uchiyama, Mio
    Sancak, Irem Gul
    Paparella, Michael Mauro
    Cureoglu, Sebahattin
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2019, 40 (08) : E839 - E846
  • [28] Listening evaluation of cochlear implant users: comparison of subjective and objective evaluation by visual analogue scale
    Yano, T.
    Tomioka, R.
    Shirai, K.
    Nishiyama, N.
    Tsukahara, K.
    JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY, 2024, 138 (03): : 297 - 300
  • [29] The Influence of a Cochlear Implant Electrode on the Mechanical Function of the Inner Ear
    Huber, Alexander M.
    Hoon, Sim Jae
    Sharouz, Bonabi
    Daniel, Bodmer
    Albrecht, Eiber
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2010, 31 (03) : 512 - 518
  • [30] Comparison of Electroaudiometry with cochlear implant in children with inner ear anomaly
    Takanami, T.
    Ito, K.
    Yamasoba, T.
    Kaga, K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2009, 73 (01) : 153 - 158