Calvino Miryam, Sánchez-Cuadrado Isabel, Gavilán Javier, Lassaletta Luis
Department of Otolaryngology, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Research Institute, Madrid, Spain.
Department of Otolaryngology, La Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ Research Institute, Madrid, Spain,
Audiol Neurootol. 2018;23(6):345-355. doi: 10.1159/000496191. Epub 2019 Feb 8.
The otosclerotic process may influence the performance of the cochlear implant (CI). Difficulty in inserting the electrode array due to potential ossification of the cochlea, facial nerve stimulation, and instability of the results are potential challenges for the CI team.
To evaluate hearing results and subjective outcomes of CI users with otosclerosis and to compare them with those of CI users without otosclerosis.
Retrospective review of 239 adults with bilateral profound postlingual deafness who underwent unilateral cochlear implantation between 1992 and 2017. Hearing and speech understanding were assessed via pure-tone audiometry and speech perception tests. Subjective outcomes were assessed via the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ), the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), and the Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (HISQUI19) at 6 months, 12 months, and at the last follow-up.
Subjects were 22 CI users with otosclerosis and 217 without otosclerosis. Both groups had a similar duration of deafness and age at CI implantation. Results did not significantly differ according to group: no significant intergroup difference was found regarding the frequency of complete electrode insertion, facial stimulation, reimplantation, or PTA4 scores at the last follow-up. Regarding speech perception, no significant intergroup difference was found on any test or at any interval. Further, subjective outcomes, as measured by the GBI, NCIQ, and HISQUI19, did not significantly differ between groups.
Adults with otosclerosis and profound hearing loss derive significant benefit from CI use. Audiological and self-reported outcomes are not significantly different from that of other CI users with postlingual deafness.
耳硬化症进程可能会影响人工耳蜗（CI）的性能。由于耳蜗可能发生骨化、面神经刺激以及结果不稳定等原因，电极阵列插入困难是人工耳蜗团队面临的潜在挑战。
评估耳硬化症人工耳蜗使用者的听力结果和主观效果，并与非耳硬化症人工耳蜗使用者进行比较。
回顾性分析1992年至2017年间接受单侧人工耳蜗植入的239例双侧重度语后聋成年人。通过纯音听力测试和言语感知测试评估听力和言语理解能力。在6个月、12个月和最后一次随访时，通过奈梅亨人工耳蜗问卷（NCIQ）、格拉斯哥效益量表（GBI）和听力植入声音质量指数（HISQUI19）评估主观效果。
受试者包括22例耳硬化症人工耳蜗使用者和217例非耳硬化症使用者。两组在耳聋持续时间和人工耳蜗植入时的年龄方面相似。根据分组结果无显著差异：在最后一次随访时，两组在完全电极插入频率、面部刺激、再次植入或PTA4评分方面未发现显著组间差异。在言语感知方面，在任何测试或任何时间间隔均未发现显著组间差异。此外，通过GBI、NCIQ和HISQUI19测量的主观效果在两组之间也无显著差异。
患有耳硬化症和重度听力损失的成年人从人工耳蜗使用中获得显著益处。听力学和自我报告的结果与其他语后聋人工耳蜗使用者相比无显著差异。
