Cochlear implantation in patients with bilateral cochlear trauma

Serin, Gediz Murat; Derinsu, Ufuk; Sarı, Murat; Gergin, Özgül; Çiprut, Ayça; Akdaş, Ferda; Batman, Caglar

doi:10.1016/j.amjoto.2009.04.008

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To avoid confusion, 'bacterial labyrinthitis' was renamed 'meningitis'. The 'traumatic' etiology was split into 3 new groups: 'temporal bone fracture', 'acoustic trauma' and 'pressure trauma', as the consequences for nerve survival and ossification are not necessarily the same for all traumata [Kujawa and Liberman, 2009;Serin et al, 2010]. As 'congenital syphilis' was not reported in the new dataset, this etiology was omitted.…”

Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Affecting Auditory Performance of Postlinguistically Deaf Adults Using Cochlear Implants: An Update with 2251 Patients

Blamey

Artières²,

Başkent³

et al. 2012

Audiol Neurotol

546

495

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To update a 15-year-old study of 800 postlinguistically deaf adult patients showing how duration of severe to profound hearing loss, age at cochlear implantation (CI), age at onset of severe to profound hearing loss, etiology and CI experience affected CI outcome. Study Design: Retrospective multicenter study. Methods: Data from 2251 adult patients implanted since 2003 in 15 international centers were collected and speech scores in quiet were converted to percentile ranks to remove differences between centers. Results: The negative effect of long duration of severe to profound hearing loss was less important in the new data than in 1996; the effects of age at CI and age at onset of severe to profound hearing loss were delayed until older ages; etiology had a smaller effect, and the effect of CI experience was greater with a steeper learning curve. Patients with longer durations of severe to profound hearing loss were less likely to improve with CI experience than patients with shorter duration of severe to profound hearing loss. Conclusions: The factors that were relevant in 1996 were still relevant in 2011, although their relative importance had changed. Relaxed patient selection criteria, improved clinical management of hearing loss, modifications of surgical practice, and improved devices may explain the differences.

show abstract

Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Affecting Auditory Performance of Postlinguistically Deaf Adults Using Cochlear Implants: An Update with 2251 Patients

Blamey

Artières²,

Başkent³

et al. 2012

Audiol Neurotol

546

495

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, because most of the traumatic patients in the intensive care unit stay unconscious for a long period of time, the diagnosis of hearing loss may be delayed [9] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochlear Implantation in Posttraumatic Bilateral Temporal Bone Fracture

Vermeire

Brokx

Dhooge

et al. 2012

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Temporal bone (TB) fractures can cause loss of audiovestibular function. Four cases of profound hearing impairment following bilateral TB fracture are presented in this report. All patients received a cochlear implant. All 4 patients became regular users of their implants. None of the patients experienced facial nerve stimulation. Implant-aided audiometry demonstrated a hearing threshold of 28 dB HL. The performance in speech understanding was comparable to standard postlingual adult patients implanted. We believe that cochlear implantation in patients suffering from profound sensorineural hearing losses secondary to TB fractures can be an effective tool for rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…Nonauditory stimulation is an issue for some patients that have had disruption of the otic capsule. Duration of deafness is also an important factor as it is for any implantee (8,9).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With regard to the influence of otic capsular damage, Serin et al (9) have shown that outcomes can be preserved even in the presence of otic capsular damage as long as there is no obliteration. This mirrors the findings of the current study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%