Evaluation of bilaterally implanted adult subjects with the nucleus 24 cochlear implant systems

被引:84
|
作者
Ramsden, R
Greenham, P
O'Driscoll, M
Mawman, D
Proops, D
Craddock, L
Fielden, C
Graham, J
Meerton, L
Verschuur, C
Toner, J
McAnallen, T
Osborne, J
Doran, M
Gray, R
Pickerill, M
机构
[1] Manchester Royal Infirm, Manchester M13 9WL, Lancs, England
[2] Cochlear Europe Ltd, London, England
[3] Midlands Cochlear Implant Proramme, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[4] UCL, Nuffield Cochlear Implant Programme, London, England
[5] S England Cochlear Implant Programme, Southampton, Hants, England
[6] Belfast Cochlear Implant Programme, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland
[7] N Wales Cochlear Implant Programme, Glan Clwyd, Wales
[8] Cambridge Cochlear Implant Programme, Cambridge, England
关键词
cochlear implants; bilateral; nucleus; 24; adults; speech perception;
D O I
10.1097/01.mao.0000185075.58199.22
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the speech perception benefits of bilateral implantation for subjects who already have one implant. Study Design: Repeated measures. Patients: Thirty adult cochlear implant users who received their second implant from 1 to 7 years with a mean of 3 years after their first device. Ages ranged from 29 to 82 years with a mean of 57 years. Setting: Tertiary referral centers across the United Kingdom. Main Outcome Measures: Monosyllabic consonant-nucleus-consonant words and City University of New York sentences in quiet with coincident speech and noise and with the noise spatially separated from the speech by +/- 90. Results: At 9 months, results showed the second ear in noise was 13.9 +/- 5.9% worse than the first ear (p < 0.001); a significant binaural advantage of 12.6 +/- 5.4% (p < 0.001) over the first ear alone for speech and noise from the front; a 21 6% (p < 0.001) binaural advantage over the first ear alone when noise was ipsilateral to the first ear; no binaural advantage when noise was contralateral to the first ear. Conclusions: There is a significant bilateral advantage of adding a second ear for this group. We were unable to predict when the second ear would be the better performing ear, and by implanting both ears, we guarantee implanting the better ear. Sequential implantation with long delays between ears has resulted in poor second ear performance for some subjects and has limited the degree of bilateral benefit that can be obtained by these users. The dual microphone does not provide equivalent benefit to bilateral implants.
引用
收藏
页码:988 / 998
页数:11
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [1] PERFORMANCE OF ADULT INERAID AND NUCLEUS COCHLEAR IMPLANT PATIENTS AFTER 3.5 YEARS OF USE
    TYLER, RS
    LOWDER, MW
    PARKINSON, AJ
    WOODWORTH, GG
    GANTZ, BJ
    AUDIOLOGY, 1995, 34 (03): : 135 - 144
  • [2] Speech Perception and Audiometry Thresholds in Nucleus Cochlear 22 and Nucleus 24 Implant Users
    Samuel, Paola Angelica
    Schmidt Goffi Gomez, Maria Valeria
    Befi Lopes, Debora Maria
    Matas, Carla Gentile
    Tsuji, Robinson Koji
    de Brito Neto, Rubens Vuono
    Bento, Ricardo Ferreira
    INTERNATIONAL ARCHIVES OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2010, 14 (03) : 331 - 337
  • [3] A comparison of the growth of open-set speech perception between the Nucleus 22 and Nucleus 24 cochlear implant systems
    Waltzman, SB
    Cohen, NL
    Roland, JT
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY, 1999, 20 (04) : 435 - 441
  • [4] Objective Findings with Malpositioning of a Nucleus 24RE(CA) Cochlear Implant
    Pijl, Sipke
    Westerberg, Brian D.
    Gustin, Cindy
    Fong, Lisa
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF AUDIOLOGY, 2008, 19 (05) : 435 - 442
  • [5] Clinical evaluation of the Nucleus® 6 cochlear implant system: Performance improvements with SmartSound iQ
    Mauger, Stefan J.
    Warren, Chris D.
    Knight, Michelle R.
    Goorevich, Michael
    Nel, Esti
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2014, 53 (08) : 564 - 576
  • [6] Residual hearing conservation and electroacoustic stimulation with the nucleus 24 contour advance cochlear implant
    Fraysse, Bernard
    Macias, Angel Ramos
    Sterkers, Olivier
    Burdo, Sandro
    Ramsden, Richard
    Deguine, Olivier
    Klenzner, Thomas
    Lenarz, Thomas
    Rodriguez, Manuel Manrique
    Von Wallenberg, Ernst
    James, Chris
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2006, 27 (05) : 624 - 633
  • [7] The Change in Electrical Stimulation Levels During 24 Months Postimplantation for a Large Cohort of Adults Using the Nucleus® Cochlear Implant
    Gajadeera, Emalka A.
    Galvin, Karyn L.
    Dowell, Richard C.
    Busby, Peter A.
    EAR AND HEARING, 2017, 38 (03) : 357 - 367
  • [8] Preliminary experience with neural response telemetry in the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant
    Brown, CJ
    Abbas, PJ
    Gantz, BJ
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OTOLOGY, 1998, 19 (03) : 320 - 327
  • [9] Evaluation of TIMIT Sentence List Equivalency with Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients
    King, Sarah E.
    Firszt, Jill B.
    Reeder, Ruth M.
    Holden, Laura K.
    Strube, Michael
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF AUDIOLOGY, 2012, 23 (05) : 313 - 331
  • [10] Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients Experiencing Loss of Usable Acoustic Hearing in the Implanted Ear
    Plant, Kerrie L.
    van Hoesel, Richard J. M.
    McDermott, Hugh J.
    Dawson, Pamela W.
    Cowan, Robert S.
    EAR AND HEARING, 2015, 36 (03) : 338 - 356