Auris, nasus, larynx · 2010
The relativity of integrity testing by telemetry in the diagnosis of cochlear implant defect: A case study and literature review.
Клинический случайСтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Alharbi Fahd Ali, Spreng Martin, Issing Peter Rolf
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This paper report a rare case that showed the limitation of integrity testing by telemetry in detecting the cause of cochlear implant defect.
METHOD: We are reporting the case of a 45-year-old female who received a cochlear implant 10 years ago, owing to a profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Following the cochlear implant the patient's speech discrimination threshold improved dramatically. In March 2009, after a car accident, the patient was unable to hear. The clinical and radiological examination revealed no abnormality, nor did the telemetry test, with normal implant function and normal NRT. The proceeding medical treatment with a corticosteroid therapy and hearing rehabilitation brought no improvement. Thus we decided to revise both implantations.
RESULT: The cochlear reimplantation was postoperatively found to have brought a marked improvement in the hearing and speech discrimination threshold. Conclusively we chose to perform a second cochlear reimplantation on the opposite side which after surgery revealed the same postoperative result.
CONCLUSION: The telemetry test does not always enable one to discover the cause of the cochlear implant failure.
METHOD: We are reporting the case of a 45-year-old female who received a cochlear implant 10 years ago, owing to a profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Following the cochlear implant the patient's speech discrimination threshold improved dramatically. In March 2009, after a car accident, the patient was unable to hear. The clinical and radiological examination revealed no abnormality, nor did the telemetry test, with normal implant function and normal NRT. The proceeding medical treatment with a corticosteroid therapy and hearing rehabilitation brought no improvement. Thus we decided to revise both implantations.
RESULT: The cochlear reimplantation was postoperatively found to have brought a marked improvement in the hearing and speech discrimination threshold. Conclusively we chose to perform a second cochlear reimplantation on the opposite side which after surgery revealed the same postoperative result.
CONCLUSION: The telemetry test does not always enable one to discover the cause of the cochlear implant failure.