AHL, SSD and bimodal CI results in children

Macías, Ángel Ramos; Barreiro, Silvia Borkoski; González, J. Segura; Miguel, Ángel Ramos de

doi:10.1016/j.anorl.2016.04.017

Cited by 8 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, all 4 studies were included because each evaluated a different outcome of interest (eTable 3 in the Supplement). Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of analyzed studies [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15 Results of the present systematic review show that most children (79.6%) experienced improved speech perception in noise after cochlear implantation, which was clinically meaningful according to the study authors. 27,28,30,32,34,[36][37][38] Two studies, [28][29][30][31][32]34,36,37 however, emphasized the lack of improvement among children with congenital SSD who received an implant after age 4 years. In addition, these studies reported a high prevalence of CMV-related SSD, which was possibly a factor in inferior outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight studies 27,28,30,32,34,[36][37][38] (66.7%) evaluated 49 children in total assessed speech perception in noise (Table 2). All studies presented background noise at 60 to 70 dB, and although various configurations were used, all studies measured the sound and noise from 0°azimuth (S0N0) testing configuration, and we reported these results for consistency.…”

Section: Audiological Outcomes Speech Perception In Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cochlear Implantation in Children With Single-Sided Deafness

Benchetrit

Ronner

Anne

et al. 2021

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCEIn 2019, the US Food and Drug Administration approved cochlear implantation for children with single-sided deafness (SSD). The absence of robust clinical data specific to pediatric patients to guide shared decision-making and to identify potential advantages is a challenge in family counseling.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the audiological and patient-reported outcomes in children who underwent cochlear implantation for SSD and to assess the association between time of implantation, subjective outcomes, and cochlear implant device use rates.DATA SOURCE MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and PubMed were searched for English-language articles that were published in a peer-reviewed journal from database inception to February 18, 2020.STUDY SELECTION Inclusion criteria were designed to capture studies that evaluated pediatric patients (1) younger than 18 years, (2) with a diagnosis of SSD for which they underwent a cochlear implantation, and (3) with at least 1 outcome of interest measured numerically: speech perception, sound localization, device use, and patient-reported outcomes. Of the 526 articles reviewed, 12 (2.3%) met the selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISThe Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines were followed. Data were pooled using fixed-effect and random-effect models. The following information was obtained from each article: study characteristics, patient characteristics, hearing loss and intervention characteristics, and outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESOutcomes were (1) postoperative changes in speech perception (in quiet was measured as a proportion of correct responses, and in noise was measured as decibel signal to noise ratio for speech reception threshold) and sound localization (measured in degree of localization error), (2) patient-reported audiological outcomes (measured by the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale), and (3) device use rates among children who received cochlear implantation for SSD. RESULTSTwelve observational studies that evaluated 119 children (mean [SD] age, 6.6 [4.0] years) with SSD who received a cochlear implant were included. Most children showed clinically meaningful improvement in speech perception in noise (39 of 49 children [79.6%]) and in quiet (34 of 42 children [81.0%]). Long duration of deafness (>4 years in congenital SSD and >7 years in perilingual SSD) was the most commonly proposed reason for lack of improvement. Sound localization as measured by degrees of error from true location (mean difference [MD], -24.78°; 95% CI, -34.16°to -15.40°; I 2 = 10%) improved statistically significantly after cochlear implantation. Patients with acquired SSD and shorter duration of deafness compared with those with congenital SSD reported greater improvements in speech (MD, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.89-2.65 vs 1.58; 95% CI, 1.00-2.16) and spatial (MD, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.66-3.24 vs 1.68; 95% CI, 0.96-2.39) hearing qualities. The duration of deafness among device nonusers was statistically significantly longer than t...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Audiological Outcomes Speech Perception In Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cochlear Implantation in Children With Single-Sided Deafness

Benchetrit

Ronner

Anne

et al. 2021

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet, the most effective treatment for each ear should be provided to children with hearing loss ( Gordon et al, 2015 ). Whereas symmetric hearing loss can be treated with similar devices in each ear (two cochlear implant (CIs) for severe/profound deafness or two hearing aids (HAs) for less severe hearing impairments), children with asymmetric hearing loss may require electrical stimulation of the deaf ear with a CI and amplified acoustic sound through a HA in the better ear ( Arndt et al, 2015 , Cadieux et al, 2013 , Ramos Macias et al, 2016 ). It is not clear, however, that this bimodal input (electrical CI in one ear and acoustic HA in the other) can be combined to limit unilaterally driven reorganization or promote binaural/spatial hearing in children.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delayed access to bilateral input alters cortical organization in children with asymmetric hearing

Polonenko

Papsin

Gordon

2018

NeuroImage: Clinical

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilateral hearing in early development protects auditory cortices from reorganizing to prefer the better ear. Yet, such protection could be disrupted by mismatched bilateral input in children with asymmetric hearing who require electric stimulation of the auditory nerve from a cochlear implant in their deaf ear and amplified acoustic sound from a hearing aid in their better ear (bimodal hearing). Cortical responses to bimodal stimulation were measured by electroencephalography in 34 bimodal users and 16 age-matched peers with normal hearing, and compared with the same measures previously reported for 28 age-matched bilateral implant users. Both auditory cortices increasingly favoured the better ear with delay to implanting the deaf ear; the time course mirrored that occurring with delay to bilateral implantation in unilateral implant users. Preference for the implanted ear tended to occur with ongoing implant use when hearing was poor in the non-implanted ear. Speech perception deteriorated with longer deprivation and poorer access to high-frequencies. Thus, cortical preference develops in children with asymmetric hearing but can be avoided by early provision of balanced bimodal stimulation. Although electric and acoustic stimulation differ, these inputs can work sympathetically when used bilaterally given sufficient hearing in the non-implanted ear.

show abstract

“…SSD has been estimated to affect between 12 and 27 individuals in every 100,000 people in the general population, with the majority of HL being sudden and idiopathic. 3 The overall prevalence of UHL in adult Americans is 7.2%, with 1.5% (0.1% to 2.1%) experiencing moderate (or worse) UHL (SSD). 8 Additionally, nearly one third of those who experience at least moderate UHL report having trouble hearing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-sided deafness and unilateral auditory deprivation in children: current challenge of improving sound localization ability

Liu

Zhou

et al. 2020

J Int Med Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interaural time difference and interaural level difference signals are insufficient in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD). This insufficiency leads to an absence of sound localization abilities and a decrease in speech intelligibility in noisy environments. SSD occurring in children further affects their language learning and cognitive abilities and their academic performance because they lack spatial abilities and binaural hearing. The early stages of central auditory system development are critical for auditory function development and morphological refinement. SSD occurring in the critical period can cause significant lateralization in the bilateral auditory pathway. This may increase the risk that affected individuals cannot re-establish binaural benefits after rehabilitation of hearing loss in the post-sensitive period. For otorhinolaryngologists, there is the concern that children with congenital SSD cannot benefit from cochlear implantation. Only a few studies have investigated auditory rehabilitation in children with congenital SSD with cochlear implantation and their results were inconsistent. The present review aims to clarify the main problems and challenges of clinical rehabilitation of congenital SSD, particularly focusing on the effect of CI on sound localization ability in children with congenital SSD.

show abstract

AHL, SSD and bimodal CI results in children

Abstract: Children in a bimodal situation, with substantial hearing (>70% speech discrimination) in the ear with HA, obtain clinically relevant speech perception benefit after cochlear implantation in the contralateral side.

Cited by 8 publications

References 27 publications

Cochlear Implantation in Children With Single-Sided Deafness

Cochlear Implantation in Children With Single-Sided Deafness

Delayed access to bilateral input alters cortical organization in children with asymmetric hearing

Single-sided deafness and unilateral auditory deprivation in children: current challenge of improving sound localization ability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About