3.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Preservation of residual hearing in children and post-lingually deafened adults after cochlear implantation: An initial study

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000064134

关键词

residual hearing; cochlear implant; Med-El; soft surgery technique

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective:To investigate whether the residual hearing of severely hearing-impaired children and adults could be preserved using the soft surgery approach. Patients and Methods: This project employed a prospective study design. All testing and surgery took place in the Institute of Physiology and Pathology of Hearing, Warsaw, Poland. Twenty-six patients (7 children and 19 post-lingually deafened adults) with residual hearing were assessed. Subjects were assessed using conventional pure-tone audiometry at least 1 month prior to surgery. Cochlear implant surgery with a Med-EI Combi 40/40+ standard electrode array was conducted, using the soft surgery approach. Pure-tone audiometry thresholds were reassessed at least 1 month after surgery. The researchers assessed change in auditory thresholds using pure-tone audiometry to determine preservation of residual hearing. Results: Sixteen of 26 patients (62%) retained their residual hearing within 5 dB HL of pre-operative scores. Only 5 of 26 patients (19%) lost all measurable residual hearing after cochlear implantation. This suggests that surgeons are often able to preserve residual hearing during cochlear implant surgery using the soft surgery technique. Conclusions: Preservation of residual hearing is an important consideration in cochlear implantation in the light of changing selection criteria for cochlear implant candidates, and as younger children are receiving implants. This is important, as we do not know yet the long-term effects of inner ear damage due to traumatic insertions of electrodes. This finding suggests a good prognosis for future possibilities of re-implantation. Copyright (C) 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据