Etiology and therapy indication for cochlear implantation in children with single-sided deafness

Cushing, Sharon L.; Gordon, Karen A.; Sokolov, Meirav; Papaioannou, Vicky; Polonenko, Melissa J.; Papsin, Blake C.

doi:10.1007/s00106-019-00729-8

Cited by 26 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, 4 of 11 of our congenital SSD CI recipients had a cCMV infection. The literature reports a percentage of > 20% cCMV infection as cause for congenital SSD [ 12 , 30 ]. This emphasises the need to implement a nationwide cCMV screening.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term results of cochlear implantation in children with congenital single-sided deafness

Rauch

Arndt

Aschendorff

et al. 2020

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the outcome and critical age of cochlear implantation in congenital single-sided deafness (SSD). Methods 11 children with congenital SSD were implanted with a cochlear implant (CI). Auditory performance was measured through the results of speech discrimination, subjective assessment by the Categories of auditory performance (CAP) score, the Speech, Spatial and Qualities scale questionnaire (SSQ) and the German version of the IOI-HA [Internationales Inventar zur Evaluation von Hörgeräten (IIEH, version for CI)]. Results Long-term follow-up [median: 3 years and 5 months (3;5 years)] revealed that nine children use their CI (> 8 h/day) and two became nonusers. In children aged below 3;2 years at surgery, there was a substantial long-term increase in speech discrimination and subjective benefit. Children over 4;4 years of age at CI surgery improved partially in audiological/subjective measurements. Among children above 5 years, the SSQ score did not improve despite further slight improvement in speech discrimination long-term. Conclusion Our data suggest a critical age for CI surgery below 3 years in children with congenital SSD for successful hearing rehabilitation. It is mandatory to identify children with SSD as early as bilaterally deaf children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term results of cochlear implantation in children with congenital single-sided deafness

Rauch

Arndt

Aschendorff

et al. 2020

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recently, longitudinal measures in a small group of toddlers with SSD demonstrated the potential for the CI to reverse cortical preference for the intact ear over a short period of 6 months 17 . However, CIs in children with SSD are not considered standard of care at present in most countries 28,29 . Even in adult patients with SSD, CIs are more often considered to alleviate incapacitating tinnitus in the deaf ear 30,31 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Consistent and chronic cochlear implant use partially reverses cortical effects of single sided deafness in children

Lee

Smieja

Polonenko

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potentially neuroprotective effects of CI use were studied in 22 children with single sided deafness (SSD). Auditory-evoked EEG confirmed strengthened representation of the intact ear in the ipsilateral auditory cortex at initial CI activation in children with early-onset SSD (n = 15) and late-onset SSD occurring suddenly in later childhood/adolescence (n = 7). In early-onset SSD, representation of the hearing ear decreased with chronic CI experience and expected lateralization to the contralateral auditory cortex from the CI increased with longer daily CI use. In late-onset SSD, abnormally high activity from the intact ear in the ipsilateral cortex reduced, but responses from the deaf ear weakened despite CI use. Results suggest that: (1) cortical reorganization driven by unilateral hearing can occur throughout childhood; (2) chronic and consistent CI use can partially reverse these effects; and (3) CI use may not protect children with late-onset SSD from ongoing deterioration of pathways from the deaf ear.

show abstract

“…First, studies have demonstrated that, as with adults, considering each ear individually is critically important in the determination of CI candidacy for pediatric patients. [52][53][54] Maintenance of binaural stimulation is essential for localization and understanding speech in noise. Fortunately, FDA labeling was updated in July 2019 to include children aged 5 years and older who have SSD or asymmetric hearing loss with extremely poor word recognition (<5%).…”

Section: Pediatric Cochlear Implantationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cushing et al suggest that every effort must be made to limit the period of auditory deprivation in CI candidate ear, encouraging CI as early as possible before the age of 4 years in the case of congenital deafness. 53,58 Importantly, the combination of acoustic hearing in the better ear with electric in the poorer hearing ear, generally improves the pediatric recipient's outcomes.…”

Section: Pediatric Cochlear Implantationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…63,65,66 In addition, earlier implantation has been shown to have better vocabulary outcomes, 67 better speech production, 63 auditory performance, and receptive language scores, 68 even if the contralateral ear is completely normal. 53 A series of 21 children who were implanted as early as 10 months (up to age 11 years) showed significant improvements in the combined head shadow effect, lateralization, and parental overall level of satisfaction. 69 Children also seem to be accepting of CI.…”

Section: Pediatric Cochlear Implantationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolving Criteria for Adult and Pediatric Cochlear Implantation

Varadarajan

Sydlowski

et al. 2020

Ear Nose Throat J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The indications for cochlear implantation have gradually expanded as advancements in technology have evolved, resulting in improved audiologic outcomes for both adult and children. There remains a significant underutilization of cochlear implant technology in the United States, and recognition of the potential benefits of cochlear implantation for non-traditional indications is critical for encouraging the evolution of candidacy criteria. Adult cochlear implantation candidacy has progressed from patients with bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) to include patients with greater degrees of residual hearing, single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing, and atypical etiologies of hearing loss (eg, vestibular schwannoma, Ménière’s disease, and otosclerosis). Indications for pediatric cochlear implantation have similarly evolved from children with bilateral severe to profound SNHL to implanting children at a younger age, including those with residual hearing, asymmetric hearing loss, inner ear malformations, as well as cochlear nerve deficiency. In this editorial, the literature investigating cochlear implantation for nontraditional indications is reviewed with an aim to use the best available evidence to encourage the evolution of candidacy criteria.

show abstract

Etiology and therapy indication for cochlear implantation in children with single-sided deafness

Cited by 26 publications

References 41 publications

Long-term results of cochlear implantation in children with congenital single-sided deafness

Long-term results of cochlear implantation in children with congenital single-sided deafness

Consistent and chronic cochlear implant use partially reverses cortical effects of single sided deafness in children

Evolving Criteria for Adult and Pediatric Cochlear Implantation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About