Value of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Children With Cochlear Nerve Deficiency

Adunka, Oliver F.; Jewells, Valerie; Buchman, Craig A.

doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e31805153f0

Cited by 27 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results of Adunka et al (2007), however, indicate that neither internal auditory canal nor bony CN canal size can accurately predict CN deficiency. They suggest that MRI is the most reliable imaging modality for diagnosis of CN aplasia and recommend it be used for determining CI candidacy in all children with severe to profound hearing loss (Adunka et al, 2007). Trimble et al (2007) present an algorithm for preoperative pediatric CI imaging that balances the advantages of HRCT scanning (shorter imaging time requiring less sedation, increased bony detail) with the benefits of MRI (detection of CN aplasia, avoidance of radiation associated with CT, ability to diagnosis intracranial abnormalities).…”

Section: Etiology Of Hearing Loss Genetic Testing and Radiologic Immentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Prior reports suggested that structural features seen on HRCT, such as stenosis of the internal auditory canal, were indicative of CN aplasia and, thus, poor performance with a CI (Jackler, Luxford, & House, 1987;Shelton, Luxford, Tonokawa, Lo, & House, 1989). Results of Adunka et al (2007), however, indicate that neither internal auditory canal nor bony CN canal size can accurately predict CN deficiency. They suggest that MRI is the most reliable imaging modality for diagnosis of CN aplasia and recommend it be used for determining CI candidacy in all children with severe to profound hearing loss (Adunka et al, 2007).…”

Section: Etiology Of Hearing Loss Genetic Testing and Radiologic Immentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cochlear Implantation in the Very Young Child: Issues Unique to the Under-1 Population

Cosetti

Roland

2010

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the advent of cochlear implantation, candidacy criteria have slowly broadened to include increasingly younger patients. Spurred by evidence demonstrating both perioperative safety and significantly increased speech and language benefit with early auditory intervention, children younger than 12 months of age are now being successfully implanted at many centers. This review highlights the unique challenges involved in cochlear implantation in the very young child, specifically diagnosis and certainty of testing, anesthetic risk, surgical technique, intraoperative testing and postoperative programming, long-term safety, development of receptive and expressive language, and outcomes of speech perception. Overall, the current body of literature indicates that cochlear implantation prior to 1 year of age is both safe and efficacious.

show abstract

Section: Etiology Of Hearing Loss Genetic Testing and Radiologic Immentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Etiology Of Hearing Loss Genetic Testing and Radiologic Immentioning

confidence: 94%

Cochlear Implantation in the Very Young Child: Issues Unique to the Under-1 Population

Cosetti

Roland

2010

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Advances in MR imaging technology, including high-field-strength units, improved coil technology, and parallel imaging, also allow increasingly highresolution images of the inner ear and brain. [7][8][9][10] High-resolution temporal bone CT is better for assessing bone detail and can be performed at lower cost and in less time, resulting in less frequent need for sedation or anesthesia compared with MR imaging. 6,10 At our institution, MR imaging is the preferred initial imaging test performed in children with newly diagnosed SNHL.…”

Section: Work-up Of Childhood Hearing Loss and Choice Of Imaging Techmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Children with narrow IACs on CT perform worse following implantation than those with normal caliber IACs, presumably because the cochlear nerve is likely to be absent or small when the IAC is narrow. 19 Cochlear nerveϪdeficient ears may demonstrate normal caliber BCNCs in Յ23% of cases 9 and normal sized IACs in Յ73% of cases. 26 …”

Section: Classification Of Inner Ear Malformationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Part 1: Practical Aspects for Neuroradiologists

Huang¹,

Zdanski²,

Castillo³

2011

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY: SNHL is a major cause of childhood disability worldwide, affecting 6 in 1000 children. For children with prelingual hearing loss, early diagnosis and treatment is critical to optimizing speech and language development, academic achievement, and social and emotional development. Cross-sectional imaging has come to play an important role in the evaluation of children with SNHL because otolaryngologists routinely order either CT or MR imaging to assess the anatomy of the inner ears, to identify causes of hearing loss, and to provide prognostic information related to potential treatments. In this article, which is the first in a 2-part series, we describe the basic clinical approach to imaging of children with SNHL, including the utility of CT and MR imaging of the temporal bones; we review the most recent proposed classification of inner ear malformations; and we discuss nonsyndromic congenital causes of childhood SNHL.ABBREVIATIONS: ABR ϭ auditory brain stem response; BCNC ϭ bony cochlear nerve canal; CISS ϭ constructive interference in steady state; CMV ϭ cytomegalovirus; CN ϭ cochlear nerve; CND ϭ cochlear nerve deficiency; FN ϭ facial nerve; FSE ϭ fast spin-echo; IAC ϭ internal auditory canal; IP-I ϭ incomplete partition type I; IP-II ϭ incomplete partition type II; SCC ϭ semicircular canal; SNHL ϭ sensorineural hearing loss; VA ϭ vertebral artery

show abstract

“…This structure had not drawn significant attention prior to the measurement of the width and length of the BCNC in normal hearing inner ears in 1999 [Fatterpekar et al, 1999]. Since then, the dimensions of BCNC in normal hearing and in congenital bilateral/unilateral SNHL inner ears have been investigated [Fatterpekar et al, 2000;Sennaroglu and Saatci, 2004;Adunka et al, 2007;Komatsubara et al, 2007;Kono, 2008;Laury et al, 2009]. However, there have been few reports on the prevalence of BCNC hypoplasia in congenital USNHL and how this could relate to hearing loss.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implication of Bony Cochlear Nerve Canal on Hearing in Patients with Congenital Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Jang

Kim²,

Yoo

et al. 2012

Audiol Neurotol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to evaluate the dimensions of the bony cochlear nerve canal (BCNC) in congenital unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL) patients with normal inner ears, and to analyze the correlation between BCNC and hearing status. Medical records and temporal bone computed tomography (TBCT) findings of 380 patients who visited Seoul National University Hospital between January 1999 and December 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. The length and width of the BCNC at the fundus of the internal auditory canal were measured in millimeters based on the axial view of TBCT for three ear groups: normal inner ears of control group subjects (group A, 179 ears), normal inner ears on the contralateral side of USNHL patients (group B, 201 ears), and the affected inner ears in USNHL (group C, 201 ears). The mean values of length and width in group C (0.79 ± 0.36 and 1.58 ± 0.83 mm, respectively) were significantly smaller than those in group A (1.07 ± 0.10 and 2.38 ± 0.28 mm, respectively; p < 0.001) and group B (1.04 ± 0.23 and 2.33 ± 0.39 mm, respectively; p < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristic curves for BCNC were conducted to estimate the cutoff values from which the proportions of profound hearing loss increased, compared to those of mild to severe hearing loss. The areas under the curve were 0.487 ± 0.044 (p = 0.781) and 0.622 ± 0.041 (p = 0.011) for length and width, respectively. The cutoff value of width with a sensitivity of 90% for profound USNHL was 1.16 mm in otherwise normal inner ears. Clinicians would be recommended to take a close look at BCNC as one of the possible causes of hearing loss in otherwise normal inner ears of USNHL on TBCT.

show abstract

Value of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Children With Cochlear Nerve Deficiency

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

Cochlear Implantation in the Very Young Child: Issues Unique to the Under-1 Population

Cochlear Implantation in the Very Young Child: Issues Unique to the Under-1 Population

Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Part 1: Practical Aspects for Neuroradiologists

Implication of Bony Cochlear Nerve Canal on Hearing in Patients with Congenital Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About