The French Cochlear Implant Registry (EPIIC): General indicators.

Cochlear and brainstem implants have been included on the list of reimbursable products (LPPR) in France since March of 2009. The implants were initially inscribed for 5 years, after which an application for renewal with the French National Commission for the Evaluation of Medical Devices and Health Technologies (Commission Nationale d'évaluation des dispositifs médicaux et des technologies de santé - CNEDiMTS) was required [Haute Autorité de santé, 2009]. Upon registration to the list of reimbursable products, the companies and the reference centers for cochlear and brainstem implants were asked to set up a post-registration registry called EPIIC. This article reports the evolution in the EPIIC registry of the general indicators for 5051 patients over the five years from 2012-2016.

The French Cochlear Implant Registry (EPIIC): Cochlear implant candidacy assessment of off-label indications.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate in France the outcomes of cochlear implantation outside the selection criteria, off-label. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study including adults and children having received a cochlear implant (CI) in an off-label indication, that is outside the criteria established by the "Haute Autorité de santé (HAS)" in 2012. The data was collected from the "EPIIC" registry on recipients who received CIs in France between 2011 and 2014. Speech audiometry was performed at 60dB preimplantation and after one year of CI use, as well as an evaluation of the scores of the quality of life with the APHAB questionnaire, the scores for CAP and the professional/academic status in pre- and post-implantation conditions. Major and minor complications at surgery have been recorded. RESULTS: In total, 590 patients (447 adults and 143 children) with an off-label indication for CIs were included in this study from the EPIIC registry (11.7% of the whole cohort of EPIIC). For adults, the median percentage of comprehension using monosyllabic word lists was 41% in preimplantation condition versus 53% after one year of CI use (P<0.001) and 60% versus 71% in dissyllabic word lists (P<0.001). The CAP scores were 5 versus 6 in pre- and post-implantation conditions respectively (P<0.001) and the APHAB scores were statistically lower after implantation (P<0.001). In the children cohort, the median percentage of comprehension using monosyllabic word lists was 51% in preimplantation condition and 65% after CI (P<0.001), and 48% versus 82% (P<0.001) for dissyllabic word lists. The CAP scores were 5 versus 7 respectively in pre- and post-CI conditions (P<0.001). Thirty-two minor complications (5.4%) and 17 major complications (2.8%) were reported in our panel of off-label indication patients. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that a revision of the cochlear implantation candidacy criteria is necessary to allow more patients with severe or asymmetric hearing loss to benefit from a CI when there is an impact on quality of life despite the use of an optimal hearing aid.