Planned simultaneous bilateral cochlear implant operations: How often do children receive only one implant?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of planned simultaneous cochlear implant operations that do not result in simultaneous cochlear implants on the day of surgery. The frequency with which this occurs has not been reported in the literature, and such information is important for parents' pre-operative decision making. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of pediatric cochlear implant operations performed in the period January 2007-July 2010 at the Melbourne Cochlear Implant Clinic. The number of planned simultaneous cochlear implant procedures and the results of these surgeries were catalogued. Reasons for not proceeding with simultaneous cochlear implants as planned were also identified. RESULTS: In the time period examined, there were a total of 50 planned simultaneous cochlear implant operations. Of these planned simultaneous operations, 22% did not result in bilateral cochlear implants on the day of surgery, with all children involved receiving a first-side cochlear implant only. In the majority of cases, the reason for a first-side cochlear implant only was otitis media. CONCLUSION: In the time period examined, a considerable proportion of planned simultaneous cochlear implant operations did not result in simultaneous bilateral implantation on the day of surgery. It is important that the likelihood of this outcome is discussed with families during pre-operative counseling as it may influence their decision making

Outcomes for patients with sloping hearing loss given standard cochlear implants

Background: This study examined the speech perception outcomes for postlingually deafened adults using cochlear implants who preoperatively had steeply sloping hearing loss and in whom there was no attempt at electroacoustic stimulation. The aims were firstly to determine whether patients with sloping loss (SL) who received a standard-length cochlear implant electrode would show significant benefit; and secondly to compare the degree of benefit to a matched group of cochlear implant users with preoperative profound hearing loss. Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis of pre- and post-implant speech perception scores of 27 adults with sloping hearing loss and a matched group of 27 adults with profound hearing loss was conducted. Matching was based on age at implant and duration of loss. All were implanted with a Nucleus Freedom (CA) or a Nucleus 5 implant. Results: Postoperative open-set speech perception testing demonstrated significant improvement compared to pre-implant for both groups. Speech perception outcomes were better in the SL group; however, there was no significant difference between the groups in the degree of improvement pre- to post-operatively under either the condition of implant alone or binaurally. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that postlingually deafened adults with sloping hearing loss have the potential to gain significant benefit from cochlear implants, and achieve equivalent improvement in speech perception to implant recipients with profound loss. The results achieved in this group, without any attempt at hearing preservation, support the use of newer standard-length electrodes for both hearing preservation and optimal electric stimulation in patients with sloping hearing loss

Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: risks versus benefits.

BACKGROUND: The advent of universal neonatal hearing screening in some countries and the availability of screening programs for at-risk infants in other countries has facilitated earlier referral, diagnosis, and intervention for infants with hearing loss. Improvements in device technology, two decades of pediatric clinical experience, a growing recognition of the efficacy of cochlear implants for young children, and the recent change in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's age criteria to include children as young as 12 mo has led to increasing numbers of young children receiving cochlear implants. Evidence to support provision for infants younger than 12 mo is extrapolated from physiological studies, studies of children using hearing aids, and studies of children older than 12 mo of age with implants. To date, however, there are few published research findings regarding communication development in children between 6 and 12 mo of age who receive implants. The current study hypothesized that earlier implantation would lead to increased rates of language acquisition as the children were still in the critical period for their development. METHOD: A retrospective review was completed for 19 infants (mean age at implantation, 0.88 yr; range, 0.61-1.07, SD 0.15) and 87 toddlers (mean age at implantation, 1.60 yr; range, 1.13-2.00, SD 0.24) who received the multichannel implant in Melbourne, Australia. Preimplantation audiological assessments for these children included aided and unaided audiograms, auditory brain stem response, auditory steady state response (ASSR), and otoacoustic emission and indicated profound to total bilateral hearing loss in all cases. Communication assessment included completion of the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale and educational psychologists' cognitive and motor assessment. Computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, and surgical records for all cases were reviewed. Postimplantation language assessments were reported in terms of the rate of growth over time on the language comprehension and language expression subscales of the Rossetti Infant-Toddler Language Scale. RESULTS: Results demonstrated that cochlear implantation may be performed safely in very young children with excellent language outcomes. The mean rates of receptive (1.12) and expressive (1.01) language growth for children receiving implants before the age of 12 mo were significantly greater than the rates achieved by children receiving implants between 12 and 24 mo, and matched growth rates achieved by normally hearing peers. These preliminary results support the provision of cochlear implants for children younger than 12 mo of age within experienced pediatric implantation centers

Multicenter Clinical Investigation of a New Active Osseointegrated Steady-State Implant System

OBJECTIVE: A new active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant system that uses piezoelectric technology has been developed: an active osseointegrated steady-state implant system (OSI). This was the first clinical investigation undertaken to demonstrate clinical performance, safety, and benefit of the new implant system. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A multicenter prospective within-subject clinical investigation was conducted. PATIENTS: Fifty-one adult subjects with mixed and conductive hearing loss (MHL/CHL, n = 37) and single-sided sensorineural deafness (SSD, n = 14) were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Audiological evaluations included audiometric thresholds, speech recognition in noise, and quiet. Hearing and health-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs; health utilities index [HUI], abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit [APHAB], and speech, spatial of qualities of hearing scale [SSQ]), daily use, surgical and safety parameters were collected. RESULTS: Intra- and postoperative complications were few. One implant was removed before activation due to post-surgical infection. Compared with the preoperative softband tests, a significant improvement in speech recognition-in-noise was observed in the MHL/CHL group (-7.3 dB, p ≤ 0.0001) and the SSD group (-8.1 dB, p = 0.0008). In quiet, word recognition improved in the MHL/CHL group, most markedly at lower intensity input of 50 dB SPL (26.7%, p ≤ 0.0001). The results of all PROs showed a significant improvement with the new device compared with preoperative softband in the MHL/CHL group. In the SSD group significant improvements were observed in the APHAB and SSQ questionnaires. DISCUSSION: The results confirmed the clinical safety, performance, and benefit of this new treatment modality for subjects with CHL, MHL, and SSD