Assessment of outcomes of hearing and speech rehabilitation in children with cochlear implantation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
This study aimed to assess the effect of hearing and speech rehabilitation in patients with Nurotron® cochlear implants.Design
Ninety-eight paediatric patients with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural deafness who received cochlear implantation were divided into three groups according to age: group A (?3 years), group B (4-7 years), and group C (8-16 years). All patients were followed up for one year for hearing and speech performance after the surgery. The comprehensive Auditory Perception Assessment, MAIS, CAP and SIR hearing and speech assessments and rating materials were used for assessment before the surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after implant activation.Results
The scores of patients in the open-set speech assessment, Chinese Auditory Perception Assessment, MAIS, CAP and SIR significantly improved after cochlear implantation in all age groups. The younger the age at implantation, the better the results. Moreover, the hearing and speech performance of cochlear implant recipients gradually improved with the extension of rehabilitation time.Conclusions
Nurotron® Venus™ cochlear implantation can improve the hearing and speech performance of patients with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural deafness.
SUBMITTER: Liu S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6570639 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Assessment of outcomes of hearing and speech rehabilitation in children with cochlear implantation.
Liu Shaofeng S Wang Fang F Chen Peipei P Zuo Na N Wu Cheng C Ma Jun J Huang Jingjiang J Wang Chuanxi C
Journal of otology 20190205 2
<h4>Objectives</h4>This study aimed to assess the effect of hearing and speech rehabilitation in patients with Nurotron<sup>®</sup> cochlear implants.<h4>Design</h4>Ninety-eight paediatric patients with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural deafness who received cochlear implantation were divided into three groups according to age: group A (≤3 years), group B (4-7 years), and group C (8-16 years). All patients were followed up for one year for hearing and speech performance after the surger ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceCochlear implants were approved for use in adults in the 1980s, but use remains low owing to a lack of awareness regarding cochlear implantation candidacy criteria and expected outcomes. There have been limited, small series examining the safety and effectiveness of cochlear implantation in adult hearing aid (HA) users with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI).ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and effectiveness of a single-ear cochlear implant in a group of optimized adult HA users with and without MCI across a variety of domains.Design, setting, and participantsIn this nonrandomized controlled trial, a multicenter, prospective, repeated-measures investigation was conducted at 13 US institutions. The setting was academic and community-based cochlear implant programs. Eligible participants were 100 adults (aged >18 years) with postlinguistic onset of bilateral moderate sloping to profound or worse sensorineural hearing loss (≤20 years' duration). Fluent English speakers underwent an optimized bilateral HA trial for at least 30 days. Individuals with aided Consonant-Vowel Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word score in quiet of 40% or less correct in the ear to be implanted and 50% or less correct in the contralateral ear were offered cochlear implants. The first participant was enrolled on February 20, 2017, and the last participant was enrolled on May 3, 2018. The final follow-up was on December 21, 2018.InterventionsParticipants received the same cochlear implant system and contralateral HA.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measure was speech understanding in quiet (CNC word score) using both the cochlear implant and opposite ear HA. Secondary outcome measures included the following: adverse events; speech understanding in noise (AzBio signal-to-noise ratio of +10 db [+10 SNR]) Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3); Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Questionnaire 49 (SSQ49); and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).ResultsThe median age at cochlear implantation of the 96 patients included in the trial was 71 years (range, 23-91 years), and 62 patients (65%) were male. Three serious adverse events requiring revision surgery occurred, and all resolved without sequelae. By 6 months after activation, the absolute marginal mean change in CNC word score and AzBio +10 SNR was 40.5% (95% CI, 35.9%-45.0%) and 24.1% (95% CI, 18.9%-29.4%), respectively. Ninety-one percent (87 of 96) of participants had a clinically important improvement (>15%) in the CNC word score in the implant ear. Mild cognitive impairment (MoCA total score ≤25) was observed in 48 of 81 study participants (59%) at baseline. Speech perception marginal mean improvements were similar between individuals with and without baseline MCI, with values of 40.9% (95% CI, 35.2%-46.6%) and 39.6% (95% CI, 31.8%-47.4%), respectively, for CNC word score and 27.5% (95% CI, 21.0%-33.9%) and 17.8% (95% CI, 9.0%-26.6%), respectively, for AzBio +10 SNR. Statistically significant and clinically important improvements in the HUI3 and SSQ49 were evident at 6 months.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this nonrandomized controlled trial seem to indicate that cochlear implants are safe and effective in restoring speech understanding in both quiet and noise and improve quality of life in individuals with and without MCI.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03007472.
| S-EPMC7453346 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: This paper reviewed the literature on the development of and factors affecting speech perception of Mandarin-speaking children with cochlear implantation (CI). We also summarized speech outcome measures in standard Mandarin for evaluating auditory and speech perception of children with CI. Method: A comprehensive search of Google Scholar and PubMed was conducted from March to June 2021. Search terms used were speech perception/lexical tone recognition/auditory perception AND cochlear implant AND Mandarin/Chinese. Conclusion: Unilateral CI recipients demonstrated continuous improvements in auditory and speech perception for several years post-activation. Younger age at implantation and longer duration of CI use contribute to better speech perception. Having undergone a hearing aid trial before implantation and having caregivers whose educational level is higher may lead to better performance. While the findings that support the use of CI to improve speech perception continue to grow, much research is needed to validate the use of unilateral and bilateral implantation. Evidence to date, however, revealed bimodal benefits over CI-only conditions in lexical tone recognition and sentence perception in noise. Due to scarcity of research, conclusions on the benefits of bilateral CIs compared to unilateral CI or bimodal CI use cannot be drawn. Therefore, future research on bimodal and bilateral CIs is needed to guide evidence-based clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8712552 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:There is a growing interest in speech intelligibility and auditory perception of deaf children. The aim of the present study was to compare speech intelligibility and auditory perception of pre-school children with Hearing Aid (HA), Cochlear Implant (CI), and Typical Hearing (TH). Methods:The research design was descriptive-analytic and comparative. The participants comprised 75 male pre-school children aged 4-6 years in the 2017-2018 from Tehran, Iran. The participants were divided into three groups, and each group consisted of 25 children. The first and second groups were respectively selected from pre-school children with HA and CI using the convenience sampling method, while the third group was selected from pre-school children with TH by random sampling method. All children completed Speech Intelligibility Rating and Categories of Auditory Performance Questionnaires. Results:The findings indicated that the mean scores of speech intelligibility and auditory perception of the group with TH were significantly higher than those of the other groups (P < 0.0001). The mean scores of speech intelligibility in the group with CI did not significantly differ from those of the group with HA (P < 0.38). Also, the mean scores of auditory perception in the group with CI were significantly higher than those of the group with HA (P < 0.002). Conclusion:The results showed that auditory perception in children with CI was significantly higher than children with HA. This finding highlights the importance of cochlear implantation at a younger age and its significant impact on auditory perception in deaf children.
| S-EPMC7231984 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In many countries, a single cochlear implant is offered as a treatment for a bilateral hearing loss. In cases where there is asymmetry in the amount of sound deprivation between the ears, there is a dilemma in choosing which ear should be implanted. In many clinics, the choice of ear has been guided by an assumption that the reorganisation of the auditory pathways caused by longer duration of deafness in one ear is associated with poorer implantation outcomes for that ear. This assumption, however, is mainly derived from studies of early childhood deafness. This study compared outcomes following implantation of the better or poorer ear in cases of long-term hearing asymmetries. Audiological records of 146 adults with bilateral hearing loss using a single hearing aid were reviewed. The unaided ear had 15 to 72 years of unaided severe to profound hearing loss before unilateral cochlear implantation. 98 received the implant in their long-term sound-deprived ear. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to assess the relative contribution of potential predictors to speech recognition performance after implantation. Duration of bilateral significant hearing loss and the presence of a prelingual hearing loss explained the majority of variance in speech recognition performance following cochlear implantation. For participants with postlingual hearing loss, similar outcomes were obtained by implanting either ear. With prelingual hearing loss, poorer outcomes were obtained when implanting the long-term sound-deprived ear, but the duration of the sound deprivation in the implanted ear did not reliably predict outcomes. Contrary to an apparent clinical consensus, duration of sound deprivation in one ear has limited value in predicting speech recognition outcomes of cochlear implantation in that ear. Outcomes of cochlear implantation are more closely related to the period of time for which the brain is deprived of auditory stimulation from both ears.
| S-EPMC4456415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCochlear implantation is highly effective at improving hearing outcomes, but results have been limited to groupwise analysis. That is, limited data are available for individual patients that report comparisons of preoperative aided speech recognition and postimplantation speech recognition.ObjectiveTo assess changes in preoperative aided vs postoperative speech recognition scores for individual patients receiving cochlear implants when considering the measurement error for each speech recognition test.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used a prospectively maintained database of patients who received cochlear implants between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2017, at a tertiary, university-based referral center. Adults with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss undergoing cochlear implantation with 6- or 12-month postoperative measures using 1 or more speech recognition tests were studied.ExposuresCochlear implantation.Main outcomes and measuresPostoperative word recognition (consonant-nucleus-consonant word test), sentence recognition (AzBio sentences in quiet), and sentence recognition in noise (AzBio sentences in +10-dB signal-to-noise ratio) scores, and association of each speech recognition score change with aided preoperative score to each test's measurement error.ResultsAnalysis of data from a total of 470 implants from 323 patients included 253 male (53.8%) patients; the mean (SD) age was 61.2 (18.3) years. Most patients had statistically significant improvement in all speech recognition tests postoperatively beyond measurement error, including 262 (84.8%) for word recognition, 226 (87.6%) for sentence recognition, and 33 (78.6%) for sentence recognition in noise. A small number of patients had equivalent preoperative and postoperative scores, including 45 (14.5%) for word recognition, 28 (10.9%) for sentence recognition, and 9 (21.4%) for sentence recognition in noise. Four patients (1.6%) had significantly poorer scores in sentence recognition after implantation. The associations between age at implantation and change in speech recognition scores were -0.12 (95% CI, -0.23 to -0.01) for word recognition, -0.22 (95% CI, -0.34 to -0.10) for sentence recognition, and -0.10 (95% CI, -0.39 to 0.21) for sentence recognition in noise. Patients with no significant improvement were similarly distributed between all preoperative aided speech scores for word recognition (range, 0%-58%) and sentence recognition (range, 0%-56%) testing.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, with respect to preoperative aided speech recognition, postoperative cochlear implant outcomes for individual patients were largely encouraging. However, improvements in scores for individual patients remained highly variable, which may not be adequately represented in groupwise analyses and reporting of mean scores. Presenting individual patient data from a large sample of individuals with cochlear implants provides a better understanding of individual differences in speech recognition outcomes and contributes to more complete interpretations of successful outcomes after cochlear implantation.
| S-EPMC7791403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cochlear implants are a standard therapy for deafness, yet the ability of implanted patients to understand speech varies widely. To better understand this variability in outcomes, the authors used functional near-infrared spectroscopy to image activity within regions of the auditory cortex and compare the results to behavioral measures of speech perception.The authors studied 32 deaf adults hearing through cochlear implants and 35 normal-hearing controls. The authors used functional near-infrared spectroscopy to measure responses within the lateral temporal lobe and the superior temporal gyrus to speech stimuli of varying intelligibility. The speech stimuli included normal speech, channelized speech (vocoded into 20 frequency bands), and scrambled speech (the 20 frequency bands were shuffled in random order). The authors also used environmental sounds as a control stimulus. Behavioral measures consisted of the speech reception threshold, consonant-nucleus-consonant words, and AzBio sentence tests measured in quiet.Both control and implanted participants with good speech perception exhibited greater cortical activations to natural speech than to unintelligible speech. In contrast, implanted participants with poor speech perception had large, indistinguishable cortical activations to all stimuli. The ratio of cortical activation to normal speech to that of scrambled speech directly correlated with the consonant-nucleus-consonant words and AzBio sentences scores. This pattern of cortical activation was not correlated with auditory threshold, age, side of implantation, or time after implantation. Turning off the implant reduced the cortical activations in all implanted participants.Together, these data indicate that the responses the authors measured within the lateral temporal lobe and the superior temporal gyrus correlate with behavioral measures of speech perception, demonstrating a neural basis for the variability in speech understanding outcomes after cochlear implantation.
| S-EPMC4844823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:HypothesisGene expression changes occur in conjunction with hearing threshold changes after cochlear implantation.BackgroundBetween 30 and 50% of individuals who receive electro-acoustic stimulation (EAS) cochlear implants lose residual hearing after cochlear implantation, reducing the benefits of EAS. The mechanism underlying this hearing loss is unknown; potential pathways include mechanical damage, inflammation, or tissue remodeling changes.MethodsGuinea pigs were implanted in one ear with cochlear implant electrode arrays, with non-implanted ears serving as controls, and allowed to recover for 1, 3, 7, or 14 days. Hearing threshold changes were measured over time. Cochlear ribonucleic acid was analyzed using real-time quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction from the following gene families: cytokines, tight junction claudins, ion and water (aquaporin) transport channels, gap junction connexins, and tissue remodeling genes.ResultsSignificant increases in expression were observed for cochlear inflammatory genes (Cxcl1, IL-1β, TNF-α, and Tnfrsf1a/b) and ion homeostasis genes (Scnn1γ, Aqp3, and Gjb3). Upregulation of tissue remodeling genes (TGF-β, MMP2, MMP9) as well as a paracrine gene (CTGF) was also observed. Hearing loss occurred rapidly, peaking at 3 days with some recovery at 7 and 14 days after implantation. MM9 exhibited extreme upregulation of expression and was qualitatively associated with changes in hearing thresholds.ConclusionCochlear implantation induces similar changes as middle ear inflammation for genes involved in inflammation and ion and water transport function, whereas tissue remodeling changes differ markedly. The upregulation of MMP9 with hearing loss is consistent with previous findings linking stria vascularis vessel changes with cochlear implant-induced hearing loss.
| S-EPMC4884452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cochlear implants provide individuals who are deaf with access to speech. Although substantial advancements have been made by novel technologies, there still is high variability in language development during childhood, depending on adaptation and neural plasticity. These factors have often been investigated in the auditory domain, with the mismatch negativity as an index for sensory and phonological processing. Several studies have demonstrated that the MMN is an electrophysiological correlate for hearing improvement with cochlear implants. In this study, two groups of cochlear implant users, both with very good basic hearing abilities but with non-overlapping speech performance (very good or very poor speech performance), were matched according to device experience and age at implantation. We tested the perception of phonemes in the context of specific other phonemes from which they were very hard to discriminate (e.g., the vowels in /bu/ vs. /bo/). The most difficult pair was individually determined for each participant. Using behavioral measures, both cochlear implants groups performed worse than matched controls, and the good performers performed better than the poor performers. Cochlear implant groups and controls did not differ during time intervals typically used for the mismatch negativity, but earlier: source analyses revealed increased activity in the region of the right supramarginal gyrus (220-260 ms) in good performers. Poor performers showed increased activity in the left occipital cortex (220-290 ms), which may be an index for cross-modal perception. The time course and the neural generators differ from data from our earlier studies, in which the same phonemes were assessed in an easy-to-discriminate context. The results demonstrate that the groups used different language processing strategies, depending on the success of language development and the particular language context. Overall, our data emphasize the role of neural plasticity and use of adaptive strategies for successful language development with cochlear implants.
| S-EPMC5215792 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSensorineural hearing loss occurs as a result of damage to the hair cells in the cochlea, or to the auditory nerve. It negatively affects learning and development in children, and employment and economic attainment in adults. Current policy in Ontario is to provide unilateral cochlear implantation for patients with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. However, hearing with both ears as a result of bilateral cochlear implantation may offer added benefits.MethodsWe completed a health technology assessment, which included an evaluation of clinical benefits and harms, value for money, budget impact, and patient preferences related to bilateral cochlear implantation. We performed a systematic literature search for studies on bilateral cochlear implantation in adults and children from inception to March 2017. We conducted a cost-utility analysis with a lifetime horizon from a public payer perspective and analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding bilateral cochlear implantation in adults and children in Ontario for the next 5 years. Finally, we conducted interviews with adults who have sensorineural hearing loss and unilateral or bilateral cochlear implants, and with parents of children with bilateral cochlear implants.ResultsWe included 24 publications (10 in adults, 14 in children) in the clinical evidence review. Compared with unilateral cochlear implantation, bilateral cochlear implantation improved sound localization, speech perception in noise, and subjective benefits of hearing in adults and children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss (GRADE: moderate to high). Bilateral cochlear implantation also allowed for better language development and more vocalization in preverbal communication in children (GRADE: moderate). The safety profile was acceptable.Bilateral cochlear implantation was more expensive and more effective than unilateral cochlear implantation. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $48,978/QALY in adults and between $27,427/QALY and $30,386/QALY in children. Cost-effectiveness was highly dependent on the quality-of-life values used. We estimated that the net budget impact of publicly funding bilateral cochlear implantation for adults in Ontario would be between $510,000 and $780,000 per year for the next 5 years.Patients described the social and emotional effects of hearing loss, and the benefits and challenges of using cochlear implants.ConclusionsBased on evidence of moderate to high quality, we found that bilateral cochlear implantation improved hearing in adults and children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Bilateral cochlear implantation was potentially cost-effective compared to unilateral cochlear implantation in adults and children. Patients with sensorineural hearing loss reported the positive effects of cochlear implants, and patients with unilateral cochlear implants generally expressed a desire for bilateral implants.
| S-EPMC6235073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe variability in outcomes of cochlear implantation is largely unexplained, and clinical factors are not sufficient for predicting performance. Genetic factors have been suggested to impact outcomes, but the clinical and genetic heterogeneity of hereditary hearing loss makes it difficult to determine and interpret postoperative performance. It is hypothesized that genetic mutations that affect the neuronal components of the cochlea and auditory pathway, targeted by the cochlear implant (CI), may lead to poor performance. A large cohort of CI recipients was studied to verify this hypothesis.DesignThis study included a large German cohort of CI recipients (n = 123 implanted ears; n = 76 probands) with a definitive genetic etiology of hearing loss according to the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG)/Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guidelines and documented postoperative audiological outcomes. All patients underwent preoperative clinical and audiological examinations. Postoperative CI outcome measures were based on at least 1 year of postoperative audiological follow-up for patients with postlingual hearing loss onset (>6 years) and 5 years for children with congenital or pre/perilingual hearing loss onset (≤6 years). Genetic analysis was performed based on three different methods that included single-gene screening, custom-designed hearing loss gene panel sequencing, targeting known syndromic and nonsyndromic hearing loss genes, and whole-genome sequencing.ResultsThe genetic diagnosis of the 76 probands in the genetic cohort involved 35 genes and 61 different clinically relevant (pathogenic, likely pathogenic) variants. With regard to implanted ears (n = 123), the six most frequently affected genes affecting nearly one-half of implanted ears were GJB2 (21%; n = 26), TMPRSS3 (7%; n = 9), MYO15A (7%; n = 8), SLC26A4 (5%; n = 6), and LOXHD1 and USH2A (each 4%; n = 5). CI recipients with pathogenic variants that influence the sensory nonneural structures performed at or above the median level of speech performance of all ears at 70% [monosyllable word recognition score in quiet at 65 decibels sound pressure level (SPL)]. When gene expression categories were compared to demographic and clinical categories (total number of compared categories: n = 30), mutations in genes expressed in the spiral ganglion emerged as a significant factor more negatively affecting cochlear implantation outcomes than all clinical parameters. An ANOVA of a reduced set of genetic and clinical categories (n = 10) identified five detrimental factors leading to poorer performance with highly significant effects ( p < 0.001), accounting for a total of 11.8% of the observed variance. The single strongest category was neural gene expression accounting for 3.1% of the variance.ConclusionsThe analysis of the relationship between the molecular genetic diagnoses of a hereditary etiology of hearing loss and cochlear implantation outcomes in a large German cohort of CI recipients revealed significant variabilities. Poor performance was observed with genetic mutations that affected the neural components of the cochlea, supporting the "spiral ganglion hypothesis."
| S-EPMC10583923 | biostudies-literature