2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2015.02.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long term outcome of cochlear implantation in five children with common cavity deformity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our study, postoperative CAP and SIR scores were significantly better than preoperative scores, although there were significant differences between CCD and control groups in CAP, SIR scores and aided hearing thresholds. It demonstrates that cochlear implantation is an effective treatment for patients with and without CCD, with hearing and speech outcomes in CCD patients being inferior compared to those without CCD, which is consistent with existing reports ( Beltrame et al., 2013 , Catli et al., 2015 , Pradhananga et al., 2015 ). The follow-up duration in our study ranged from 18 to 64 months, making observing the time course of auditory perception and speech ability along time somewhat difficult.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…In our study, postoperative CAP and SIR scores were significantly better than preoperative scores, although there were significant differences between CCD and control groups in CAP, SIR scores and aided hearing thresholds. It demonstrates that cochlear implantation is an effective treatment for patients with and without CCD, with hearing and speech outcomes in CCD patients being inferior compared to those without CCD, which is consistent with existing reports ( Beltrame et al., 2013 , Catli et al., 2015 , Pradhananga et al., 2015 ). The follow-up duration in our study ranged from 18 to 64 months, making observing the time course of auditory perception and speech ability along time somewhat difficult.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Several studies have shown audiological and speech benefits after CI surgery for IEM deformities, but these benefits are found to be inferior to those of CI surgery in patients with normal inner ears [8,9,13]. In general, several factors, such as age at implantation, cognitive ability, additional disability, residual hearing, parental participation, and the daily use of the cochlear implant audio processor, affect language development after CI [14].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have found that CI in patients with CC is effective and has hearing and speech benefits [7,8]. However, the audiological outcomes of CI in patients with CC were found to be not good as the other IEM [9]. The aim of this study is to present the management for a case of bilateral IEM associated with prelingual profound SNHL with radiological diagnosis of CA represented bilaterally.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This performance advantage may be due to customized electrodes in the TSLA group, which may more efficiently stimulate spiral ganglion cells due to the better position in the cochlea. For both subject groups, the improvement in CAP scores was greater than in SIR scores, consistent with previous studies . This suggests that language development may be slower than auditory development in CCD CI patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For both subject groups, the improvement in CAP scores was greater than in SIR scores, consistent with previous studies. 21 This suggests that language development may be slower than auditory development in CCD CI patients. Given that CCD performance may continue to improve 3 to 5 years after implantation, 18 more longterm follow-up is needed for CCD CI patients with greater consideration of surgical approaches and the use of standard or customized electrodes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%