Do different types of cochlear implant electrode influence hearing preservation and speech perception?

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY Acta Oto-Laryngologica Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1080/00016489.2024.2407395
Karin Hallin, Ulrika Larsson, Nadine Schart-Morén
{"title":"Do different types of cochlear implant electrode influence hearing preservation and speech perception?","authors":"Karin Hallin, Ulrika Larsson, Nadine Schart-Morén","doi":"10.1080/00016489.2024.2407395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hearing can be preserved in patients with considerable low-frequency hearing implanted with cochlear implants. However, the most favorable electrode type for hearing preservation and speech perception has been debated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to evaluate hearing preservation and speech discrimination one year post-implantation for all types of cochlear implant electrode used for adult patients implanted between 2014 and 2022.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The HEARING group formula was used to calculate the degree of hearing preservation, which was defined as minimal (0-25%), partial (25-75%) or complete (≥ 75%). Speech perception was measured by monosyllabic words.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of hearing preservation for the various electrode types revealed that FLEX 24 preserved hearing statistically significantly better (<i>p</i> < 0.05) than FLEX 28, FLEX soft, and contour advance. Also, FLEX 20 preserved hearing statistically significantly better (<i>p</i> < 0.05) than contour advance. No statistically significant difference was found for the monosyllabic word score for the different electrode types.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There was a statistically significant difference between the electrode types in terms of hearing preservation but not for speech perception. The result of this study contributes important information about hearing preservation and speech perception that can be used for pre-surgery patient counselling.</p>","PeriodicalId":6880,"journal":{"name":"Acta Oto-Laryngologica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Oto-Laryngologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00016489.2024.2407395","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hearing can be preserved in patients with considerable low-frequency hearing implanted with cochlear implants. However, the most favorable electrode type for hearing preservation and speech perception has been debated.

Objective: The aim was to evaluate hearing preservation and speech discrimination one year post-implantation for all types of cochlear implant electrode used for adult patients implanted between 2014 and 2022.

Methods: The HEARING group formula was used to calculate the degree of hearing preservation, which was defined as minimal (0-25%), partial (25-75%) or complete (≥ 75%). Speech perception was measured by monosyllabic words.

Results: Analysis of hearing preservation for the various electrode types revealed that FLEX 24 preserved hearing statistically significantly better (p < 0.05) than FLEX 28, FLEX soft, and contour advance. Also, FLEX 20 preserved hearing statistically significantly better (p < 0.05) than contour advance. No statistically significant difference was found for the monosyllabic word score for the different electrode types.

Discussion: There was a statistically significant difference between the electrode types in terms of hearing preservation but not for speech perception. The result of this study contributes important information about hearing preservation and speech perception that can be used for pre-surgery patient counselling.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同类型的人工耳蜗电极会影响听力保护和言语感知吗?
背景:植入人工耳蜗的低频听力患者可以保留听力。然而,哪种电极类型对听力保存和言语感知最有利一直存在争议:目的:评估 2014 年至 2022 年间植入人工耳蜗的成年患者植入人工耳蜗一年后使用的所有类型人工耳蜗电极的听力保存和言语辨别能力:采用听力组公式计算听力保存程度,定义为最小(0-25%)、部分(25-75%)或完全(≥ 75%)。语音感知通过单音节词进行测量:结果:对各种电极类型的听力保存情况进行分析后发现,FLEX 24 的听力保存效果明显优于 FLEX 24(p p 讨论):不同类型的电极在听力保护方面有显著的统计学差异,但在言语感知方面没有差异。本研究结果为听力保护和言语感知提供了重要信息,可用于手术前的患者咨询。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Oto-Laryngologica
Acta Oto-Laryngologica 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Oto-Laryngologica is a truly international journal for translational otolaryngology and head- and neck surgery. The journal presents cutting-edge papers on clinical practice, clinical research and basic sciences. Acta also bridges the gap between clinical and basic research.
期刊最新文献
Impact of fast-track on recurrence and malignant transformation of patients with inverted papilloma. Analysis of influencing factors of residual dizziness after repositioning of horizontal semicircular canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. Long-term outcomes of extracapsular tonsillectomy in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea in adults. Ototoxicity associated with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; what are the risk factors? Plasma knife sphenopalatine artery cauterization via lateral nasal wall incision for posterior epistaxis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1