Evaluation of Objective Test Techniques in Cochlear Implant Users With Inner Ear Malformations

被引:24
作者
Cinar, Betul Cicek [1 ]
Atas, Ahmet [2 ,3 ]
Sennaroglu, Gonca [2 ,3 ]
Sennaroglu, Levent [3 ]
机构
[1] Meders Med, Ankara, Turkey
[2] Hacettepe Univ, Audiol & Speech Pathol Unit, Ankara, Turkey
[3] Hacettepe Univ, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Ankara, Turkey
关键词
Audiologic findings; Cochlear implant; Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response; Electrically evoked compound action potentials; Electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold; Inner ear malformations; Objective test techniques; CHILDREN; CLASSIFICATION;
D O I
10.1097/MAO.0b013e318229d4af
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: The aim of the study was to compare results of objective test techniques in cochlear implant users with inner ear malformations and incomplete partition anomalies with types I and II and to show which techniques should be used in the evaluation and fitting of cochlear implant users with inner ear malformations. Study Design: Retrospective clinical study. Patients: The subjects in the control group were selected randomly from cochlear implant users with normal cochlea. Inclusion criteria for patients group were having inner ear malformation for the study group and at least 1 year cochlear implants use for both groups. Interventions: For each individual subject, electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs), electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold (ESRT), and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (EABR) thresholds were determined. These tests were applied after a normal cochlear implant fitting session. There were 20 subjects in inner ear malformation group and 15 subjects in the control group. For each subject, 6 intracochlear electrodes, representing apical, middle, and basal array of intracochlear electrode, were used. Outcomes: In the cochlear malformation group, percentage of acquired ECAP thresholds was 25%. However, in the control group, percentage of ECAP was 74%. Similarly with ECAP, percentage of ESRT in the cochlear malformation group was 17.5%, and that in the control group was 90%. The difference between these percentages was statistically significant. Both current levels and latencies of EABR wave V were significantly different from each other for the inner ear malformation group and the control group. Results: For statistical analysis, Mann-Whitney U test for 2 independent samples, Kruskal-Wallis analysis and Dunn's Z test were used. Conclusion: For the inner ear malformation group, EABR is a more applicable objective test technique when compared with ECAP and ESRT.
引用
收藏
页码:1065 / 1074
页数:10
相关论文
共 27 条
  • [1] Audiological performance after cochlear implantation in children with inner ear malformations
    Arnoldner, C
    Baumgartner, WD
    Gstoettner, W
    Egelierler, B
    Czerny, C
    Steiner, E
    Hamzavi, J
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2004, 68 (04) : 457 - 467
  • [2] Brickley Graham, 2005, Cochlear Implants Int, V6, P31, DOI 10.1002/cii.18
  • [3] The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the nucleus 24 speech processor: Data from adults
    Brown, CJ
    Hughes, ML
    Luk, B
    Abbas, PJ
    Wolaver, A
    Gervais, J
    [J]. EAR AND HEARING, 2000, 21 (02) : 151 - 163
  • [4] BROWN CJ, 1999, ANN OTOLRHINOLLARYNG, V108, P177
  • [5] BROWN CJ, 1990, EAR HEARING, V15, P168
  • [6] FIRSZT JB, 2005, OPER TECH OTOLARYNGO, V16, P131
  • [7] Loudness growth functions and EABR characteristics in Digisonic cochlear implantees
    Gallégo, S
    Garnier, S
    Micheyl, C
    Truy, E
    Morgon, A
    Collet, L
    [J]. ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA, 1999, 119 (02) : 234 - 238
  • [8] Auditory brainstem activity and development evoked by apical versus basal cochlear implant electrode stimulation in children
    Gordon, K. A.
    Papsin, B. C.
    Harrison, R. V.
    [J]. CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 2007, 118 (08) : 1671 - 1684
  • [9] An evoked potential study of the developmental time course of the auditory nerve and brainstem in children using cochlear implants
    Gordon, KA
    Papsin, BC
    Harrison, RV
    [J]. AUDIOLOGY AND NEURO-OTOLOGY, 2006, 11 (01) : 7 - 23
  • [10] Graham JM, 2000, J LARYNGOL OTOL, V114, P1