European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
Auditory outcomes after scala vestibuli array insertion are similar to those after scala tympani insertion 1 year after cochlear implantation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gu Wenxi, Daoudi Hannah, Lahlou Ghizlene, Sterkers Olivier, Ferrary Evelyne, Nguyen Yann, Mosnier Isabelle, Torres Renato
Аннотация
PURPOSE: In cochlear implantation, a scala vestibuli (SV) insertion of an electrode array is a rare occurrence and is reported to be linked to poor hearing outcomes. Using the same electrode array, the auditory performance of patients with a complete SV location was compared with that of patients having a complete scala tympani (ST) location 1 year after implantation.
METHODS: Thirty-three patients were included in this retrospective case-control study (SV, n = 12; ST, n = 21). The matching criteria were electrode array type, age at implantation, and duration of severe or profound deafness. The array location was analyzed using 3D reconstruction of postoperative CT scans. Postoperative audiological evaluation of the implanted ear was performed using pure-tone audiometry, speech recognition of monosyllabic words in quiet, and words and sentences in noise.
RESULTS: On the preoperative CT scan, six patients in the SV group presented with both round window (RW) and ST ossification, three with RW ossification alone, and three with no RW ossification. Auditory performance did not differ between SV and ST groups 1 year after cochlear implantation. Speech recognition of words was 49 ± 7.6% and 56 ± 5.0% in quiet and 75 ± 9.5% and 66 ± 6.0% in noise in SV and ST groups, respectively.
CONCLUSION: ST insertion is the gold standard that allows the three cochlear scalae to preserve scalar cochlear integrity. However, 1 year after implantation, a planned or unexpected SV insertion is not detrimental to hearing outcomes, providing similar auditory performance in quiet and noise to ST insertion.
METHODS: Thirty-three patients were included in this retrospective case-control study (SV, n = 12; ST, n = 21). The matching criteria were electrode array type, age at implantation, and duration of severe or profound deafness. The array location was analyzed using 3D reconstruction of postoperative CT scans. Postoperative audiological evaluation of the implanted ear was performed using pure-tone audiometry, speech recognition of monosyllabic words in quiet, and words and sentences in noise.
RESULTS: On the preoperative CT scan, six patients in the SV group presented with both round window (RW) and ST ossification, three with RW ossification alone, and three with no RW ossification. Auditory performance did not differ between SV and ST groups 1 year after cochlear implantation. Speech recognition of words was 49 ± 7.6% and 56 ± 5.0% in quiet and 75 ± 9.5% and 66 ± 6.0% in noise in SV and ST groups, respectively.
CONCLUSION: ST insertion is the gold standard that allows the three cochlear scalae to preserve scalar cochlear integrity. However, 1 year after implantation, a planned or unexpected SV insertion is not detrimental to hearing outcomes, providing similar auditory performance in quiet and noise to ST insertion.