Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 20 de 259
1.
Otol Neurotol ; 45(5): 529-535, 2024 Jun 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38693093

OBJECTIVE: We assessed three cochlear implant (CI) suppliers: Advanced Bionics, Cochlear Limited, and MED-EL, for implant revision requiring reoperation after CI placement. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of integrated-health-system database between 2010 and 2021. Separate models were created for pediatric (age <18) and adult (age ≥18) cohorts. PATIENTS: Pediatric (age <18) and adult (age ≥18) patients undergoing cochlear implantation within our integrated healthcare system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Revision after CI placement. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate revision risk and adjust for confounding factors. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are presented. RESULTS: A total of 2,347 patients underwent a primary CI placement, and Cochlear Limited was most implanted (51.5%), followed by Advanced Bionics (35.2%) and MED-EL (13.3%). In the pediatric cohort, the 7-year crude revision rate was 10.9% for Advanced Bionics and 4.8% for Cochlear Limited, whereas MED-EL had insufficient cases. In adults, the rates were 9.1%, 4.5%, and 3.3% for Advanced Bionics, MED-EL, and Cochlear Limited, respectively. After 2 years of postoperative follow-up, Advanced Bionics had a significantly higher revision risk (HR = 8.25, 95% CI = 2.91-23.46); MED-EL had no difference (HR = 2.07, 95% CI = 0.46-9.25). CONCLUSION: We found an increased revision risk after 2 years of follow-up for adults with Advanced Bionics CI devices. Although we found no statistical difference between manufacturers in the pediatric cohort, after 2 years of follow-up, there were increasing trends in the revision probability for Advanced Bionics. Further research may determine whether patients are better suited for some CI devices.


Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Reoperation , Humans , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Male , Retrospective Studies , Female , Child , Adult , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implantation/trends , Adolescent , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Child, Preschool , Young Adult , Aged , Infant , Cohort Studies
2.
Laryngoscope ; 134(6): 2857-2863, 2024 Jun.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38158610

OBJECTIVE(S): Despite undergoing thorough cochlear implant (CI) candidacy evaluation and counseling, some patients ultimately elect against implantation. This study sought to identify patient-related and socioeconomic factors predicting CI deferral. METHODS: A retrospective study of adult (≥18 years old) CI candidates presenting between 2007 and 2021 at a tertiary academic CI center was performed. The primary outcome was device implantation. Data collected included age, gender, hearing status, race, zip code of residence, median family income (MFI), distance traveled from the CI center, marital status, employment status, and insurance status. Multivariable binary logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of implantation. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients qualifying for CI were included, encompassing 77 adults deferring surgery (CI-deferred) and 123 consecutive adults electing for surgery (CI-pursued). Age, gender, hearing status, insurance type, employment status, distance from the implant center, and MFI were comparable between the groups (p > 0.05). Compared to CI-pursued patients, CI-deferred patients were more likely to be non-Caucasian (24.7% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.015) and unmarried (55.8% vs. 38.2%, p = 0.015). On multivariable logistic regression, older age (OR 0.981, 0.964-0.998, p = 0.027), African American race (OR 0.227, 0.071-0.726, p = 0.012), and unmarried status (OR 0.505, 0.273-0.935, p = 0.030) were independent predictors of implant deferral. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that increasing age at evaluation, African American race, and unmarried status are predictors for deferring CI surgery despite being implant candidates. These patients may benefit from increased outreach in the form of counseling, education, and social support prior to undergoing CI surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 - retrospective study with internal control group Laryngoscope, 134:2857-2863, 2024.


Cochlear Implantation , Humans , Male , Female , Retrospective Studies , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Aged , Adult , Socioeconomic Factors , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Patient Selection
3.
Otol Neurotol ; 44(2): 134-140, 2023 02 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36624590

OBJECTIVE: To assess the distance burden for access to cochlear implant (CI)-related services and to assess whether socioeconomic disadvantage or level of education and occupation influenced uptake of CIs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: A CI services provider operating across multiple centers. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing CI surgery in a 2-year period between March 2018 and February 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Diagnosis of hearing loss, CI surgery, and subsequent habilitation and mapping. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Distance traveled by patients to their audiological diagnostic, CI surgery hospital, and habilitation sites; subjects' index of relative socioeconomic advantage and disadvantage (IRSAD) and index of education and occupation (IEO). RESULTS: n = 201 children and n = 623 adults. There was a significant difference across IRSAD domains for children (p < 0.0001) and adults (p < 0.0001), and IEO in children (p = 0.015) and adults (p < 0.0001) when tested for equal proportions. The median driving distance from home to the diagnostic audiological site for children was 20 km (mean, 69 km; range, 1-1184 km; upper quartile, 79 km; lower quartile, 8 km). There was no significant difference between the driving distances from home to the CI surgery hospital site, or the mapping/habilitation sites between children and adults. There was no correlation for age at first surgery and either IRSAD/IEO. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of distance for access to CI in Australia is significant for the upper quartile who may not live within the large city centers. Greater consideration needs to be given regarding barriers to CI for those in lower socioeconomic and educational groups to ensure equity of access across different socioeconomic and educational level backgrounds.


Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Health Services Accessibility , Adult , Child , Humans , Australia/epidemiology , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Educational Status , Retrospective Studies , Low Socioeconomic Status , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Social Class , Employment/statistics & numerical data
4.
Laryngoscope ; 132(3): 670-686, 2022 03.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34191304

OBJECTIVES: Pediatric cochlear implantation (CI) is a multistep process, which exposes a healthcare system's potential weaknesses in ability to deliver timely care to deaf children. The current systematic review aims to determine the sociodemographic disparities that predict pediatric CI access and use among CI candidates and recipients across the world. We hypothesize that sociodemographic factors independently influence CI access and use within a given country. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases was conducted for studies investigating the association of sociodemographic factors such as race, income, or insurance status with measures of pediatric CI access, such as age at CI or CI rate. RESULTS: Out of 807 unique abstracts initially retrieved, 39 papers were included in the final qualitative systematic review. Twenty-seven thousand seven hundred and fifty-one CI-candidate children (6,623 CI recipients) were studied in 14 countries, with 21 studies conducted in the United States of America, published within the years of 1993 to 2020. CONCLUSION: Some measures of CI access, such as age at CI and rates of CI, are consistently reported in the CI disparities literature while others such as access to rehabilitation services, willingness to undergo CI, and daily CI use are rarely measured. There are persistently reported disparities in a few key measures of CI access in a few populations, while there are some populations with a paucity of data. Future studies should delineate the nuances in the mechanisms of disparities by conducting multivariable analysis of representative sample data. Laryngoscope, 132:670-686, 2022.


Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Child , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Socioeconomic Factors
5.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 22809, 2021 11 23.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34815432

Reducing electrode impedance is an important factor in improving the functional benefits of cochlear implants (CIs). The immediate effect of early switch-on within 24 h of surgery on impedance among CI recipients with various types of electrodes has been reported previously; however, the immediate change and the evolution of electrode impedances of slim modiolar electrodes after early switch-on within 24 h of implantation has not. Therefore, the focus of this retrospective cohort study of CI patients was to compare the effect of early switch-on (n = 36) and conventional switch-on (n = 72) 2-4 weeks post-operation on impedance. Compared with impedance measured intraoperatively, our results demonstrate a significant decrease in impedance from 11.5 to 8.9 kΩ (p < 0.001) at 2-4 weeks after implantation in the early switch-on group, which sharply contrasted with elevated impedance values for conventional switch-on 2-4 weeks after implantation (from 10.7 to 14.2 kΩ, p = 0.001). Notably, a comparatively lower impedance than the conventional switch-on protocol was observed for up to 2 months post-operation. Most importantly, a much earlier stabilization of impedance can be achieved with the early switch-on protocol coupled with the slim modiolar electrode array compared to the conventional switch-on protocol, offering the advantage of reducing the number of required mapping sessions in the early stages of rehabilitation.


Cochlea/surgery , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Electric Impedance , Electrodes, Implanted , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Retrospective Studies
6.
J Laryngol Otol ; 135(10): 918-925, 2021 Oct.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34404494

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and postponement of elective surgical procedures for profoundly deaf patients awaiting cochlear implantation. METHOD: Open-ended questionnaires were sent to all adult patients awaiting cochlear implantation surgery. Qualitative analysis was performed using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Participants described a primarily negative impact on wellbeing from the surgery delay, expressing feelings of isolation or loneliness. Low mood, depression or hopelessness were commonly expressed by elderly participants; frustration and anxiety were described by young adults. Participants described a negative impact on their general daily life, describing difficulties communicating with facemasks and struggles with reliance on telephone communication because of social distancing. Despite these significant psychosocial challenges, only a minority described adaptive coping strategies. DISCUSSION: Profoundly deaf patients may be at greater psychosocial risk because of unique challenges from their hearing disability. Our findings can be used to develop evidence-driven strategies to improve communication, wellbeing and quality of life.


COVID-19/psychology , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Deafness/surgery , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cochlear Implants/supply & distribution , Communication , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Elective Surgical Procedures/standards , Female , Frustration , Humans , Loneliness/psychology , Male , Middle Aged , Physical Distancing , Qualitative Research , Quality of Life/psychology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
7.
Laryngoscope ; 131(9): 2106-2111, 2021 09.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34043247

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Speech recognition with a cochlear implant (CI) tends to be better for younger adults than older adults. However, older adults may take longer to reach asymptotic performance than younger adults. The present study aimed to characterize speech recognition as a function of age at implantation and listening experience for adult CI users. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. METHODS: A retrospective review identified 352 adult CI recipients (387 ears) with at least 5 years of device listening experience. Speech recognition, as measured with consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) words in quiet and AzBio sentences in a 10-talker noise masker (10 dB signal-to-noise ratio), was reviewed at 1, 5, and 10 years postactivation. RESULTS: Speech recognition was better in younger listeners, and performance was stable or continued to improve through 10 years of CI listening experience. There was no indication of differences in acclimatization as a function of age at implantation. For the better performing CI recipients, an effect of age at implantation was more apparent for sentence recognition in noise than for word recognition in quiet. CONCLUSIONS: Adult CI recipients across the age range examined here experience speech recognition benefit with a CI. However, older adults perform more poorly than young adults for speech recognition in quiet and noise, with similar age effects through 5 to 10 years of listening experience. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:2106-2111, 2021.


Auditory Perception/physiology , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/surgery , Speech Perception/physiology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cochlear Implants/adverse effects , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/diagnosis , Humans , Middle Aged , Noise/adverse effects , Noise/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Signal-To-Noise Ratio , Young Adult
8.
Med Sci Monit ; 27: e930232, 2021 May 18.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34001843

BACKGROUND Indications for cochlear implantation (CI) are constantly being updated, and with them, the audiometric results achieved by patients. Patient satisfaction should always be considered, even in patients with lower audiological results. The aim of the present study was to compare quality of life (QoL), self-perceived hearing benefit, and audiometric results between prelingually and postlingually deafened patients, with and without sound deprivation, after CI. MATERIAL AND METHODS The sample included 46 patients with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss: 22 postlingually deafened and 24 prelingually deafened, further subdivided into sound-deprived (n=10) and non-sound-deprived (n=14). Auditory performance was evaluated with pure tone audiometry, speech recognition scores (SRS), and self-perceived hearing benefit, whereas QoL was evaluated with 2 self-reported questionnaires (Comprehensive Cochlear Implant Questionnaire and World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF). RESULTS Audiometric results were worse in the prelingually deafened than in the postlingually deafened group, and worse in the prelingually deafened patients with sound deprivation. There was no marked difference in perceived CI benefit or QoL between the 2 groups or within the 2 prelingually deafened subgroups. No correlation was found between SRS and duration of CI use or between QoL and SRS in the prelingually and postlingually deafened groups. CONCLUSIONS Our findings demonstrate better auditory performance for the postlingually deafened group and no differences in perceived QoL or benefit of CI between the groups. The sound-deprived patients had equal scores on the perceived QoL questionnaire. These analyses suggest that sound-deprived, prelingually deafened patients may benefit from CI.


Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Deafness/surgery , Adult , Audiometry, Pure-Tone/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hearing/physiology , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/surgery , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Quality of Life , Retrospective Studies , Sound , Speech Discrimination Tests/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
9.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 20(3): 331-345, 2021 03.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33724134

Background: Adults with immuno-compromising conditions, CSF leaks, or cochlear implants are at increased risk for pneumococcal disease (high-risk patients), yet pneumococcal vaccination rates in the US for this group are low.Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted from 2010 to 2018 using the Truven Health MarketScan database to estimate pneumococcal vaccination coverage among adults aged 19 to 64 years newly diagnosed with high-risk conditions, and to assess factors associated with receiving the recommended pneumococcal vaccines.Results: The study sample included 2,497,799 adults aged 19 to 64 years old with newly diagnosed high-risk conditions. Most of the study cohort had seven or more annual physician office (52%) and pharmacy (56%) visits. The proportion of high-risk adults who received at least one pneumococcal vaccination increased from 5.4% after 1 year of follow-up to 14.2% after 6 years of follow-up. Compared to those who received no pneumococcal vaccination, high-risk adults who received any pneumococcal vaccination were more likely to be older, female, enrolled in an HMO, had more healthcare encounters, and were treated by a primary care provider.Conclusion: Despite numerous healthcare encounters annually, very few high-risk adults received pneumococcal vaccines, highlighting the need for implementing targeted interventions to increase vaccine uptake in this vulnerable population.


Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak/epidemiology , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Immunocompromised Host , Pneumococcal Vaccines , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumococcal Infections/microbiology , Pneumococcal Infections/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Streptococcus pneumoniae/immunology , Young Adult
10.
Laryngoscope ; 131(4): E1322-E1327, 2021 04.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32876332

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether listening with two cochlear implants (bilateral) offers significant benefits in terms of speech perception over listening with one cochlear implant and one hearing aid (bimodal). METHODS: Retrospective review of bilateral cochlear implant recipients (24 pediatric and 26 adult). Bimodal listening was compared to bilateral listening in terms of speech perception performance at 1-year post second implant under three listening conditions: 50 dBHL, 35 dBHL, and 50 dBHL+5 SNR. Changes in speech performance from bimodal (before second implant) to bilateral (after second implant) listening were determined within subjects and compared to a separate control group of bimodal users matched for age of first implantation who never received a second implant (10 pediatric and 20 adult). RESULTS: In the pediatric group, compared to bimodal listening prior to a second implant, speech perception scores with bilateral implants increased significantly when measured at 50 dBHL, 35 dBHL, and 50 dBHL+5 SNR. By contrast, pediatric bimodal controls who never received a second implant failed to demonstrate similar improvement over 1 year's time. In the adult group, compared to bimodal listening prior to a second implant, speech perception scores with bilateral implants increased when measured at 50 dBHL, but were not significantly different at 35 dBHL and 50 dBHL + 5 SNR. Adult bimodal controls who never received a second implant failed to demonstrate significant improvement in all conditions over 1 year's time. CONCLUSION: Bilateral listening with two cochlear implants improved speech perception performance relative to bimodal listening in the pediatric population. Improvement in the adult population was not as significant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4, Retrospective Chart Review. Laryngoscope, 131:E1322-E1327, 2021.


Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Aids/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Loss, Bilateral/surgery , Speech Perception/physiology , Adult , Auditory Perception/physiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Loss, Bilateral/diagnosis , Humans , Infant , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
13.
Auris Nasus Larynx ; 48(4): 622-629, 2021 Aug.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33323296

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a longitudinal national survey of cochlear implantation (CI) in Japan from 1985 through 2017. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of adult and pediatric CI cases from 1985 to 2017 using the Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Society of Japan CI registration database was conducted. Surgical statistics were obtained, including number of surgeries, age, implanted side, facilities, and preoperative threshold levels for CI. RESULTS: Since 1985, more than 11,100 CI surgeries have been conducted in Japan. The number exceeded 500 in 2005 and 1,000 in 2015. Since 2007, pediatric cases consistently surpassed adult cases until 2016. More facilities meet criteria for conducting CI as determined by Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare and have now reached more than 100. Adult patients over 70 years old have become proportionally higher. Age at implantation steadily reduced in accordance with modifications of Japanese CI guidelines for children but is still not comparable to that in other developed countries. Although the number of CI surgeries for patients with moderate to severe hearing loss increased in the past ten years, the proportion was small. CONCLUSIONS: The CI database in Japan is quite unique in that it documents almost all the CI surgeries in Japan, allowing us to summarize the present situation as follows: fewer CI surgeries occur than are necessary, and children receiving implants are older than those in other developed countries. Continuous improvement of CI awareness is needed in Japan.


Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Child , Cochlear Implantation/trends , Databases, Factual , Humans , Japan , Registries , Retrospective Studies
14.
J Laryngol Otol ; 134(12): 1077-1080, 2020 Dec.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33292876

OBJECTIVE: The electrical current distribution of a cochlear implant electrode within the cochlea is essential for post-operative hearing performance. The slim straight electrode is designed to enable the placement of contacts in a lateral or medial direction to the modiolus. The electrophysiological effect of this different contact direction is so far unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of intracochlear laterally or medially directed electrode contacts on electrophysiological behaviour. METHOD: A slim straight electrode was inserted into the cochleae of five patients, and the neural response threshold was measured in a laterally and medially directed contact position. The cochleae in five temporal bone specimens were de-capped allowing an insertional observation of the contact position (lateral versus medial) of the electrode. RESULTS: There was no difference in neural response threshold between a lateral and a medial position of the contacts. Temporal bone study indicated no intracochlear torsion of the electrode. CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that the intracochlear position of slim straight electrode contacts does not affect the neural response threshold.


Cochlea/surgery , Electrodes, Implanted/adverse effects , Electrophysiological Phenomena/physiology , Hearing Loss/surgery , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Auditory Threshold/physiology , Cochlea/diagnostic imaging , Cochlear Implantation/instrumentation , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hearing Loss/diagnosis , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Period , Prospective Studies , Telemetry/methods , Temporal Bone/surgery , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
15.
Clin Interv Aging ; 15: 1555-1568, 2020.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32982193

INTRODUCTION: Nowadays cochlear implantation (CI) is the treatment of choice in adults in case conventional hearing devices fail. Besides speech perception, an improvement in quality of life and in cognitive performance has been reported. Thereby, the study focused on the impact of age. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Thirty middle-aged (MA) between 50 and 64 years and 41 older subjects (OA) aged 65 and older with bilateral severe hearing loss performed a comprehensive computer-based neurocognitive test battery (ALAcog) pre- and 12 months post-implantation. Besides, monosyllabic speech perception in quiet (Freiburg monosyllabic speech test), health-related quality of life (HR-QoL, Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire) and depressive symptoms (GDS-15) have been assessed. RESULTS: Both age groups significantly improved in all three categories after 12 months. No differences were evaluated between MA and OA regarding speech perception and HR-QoL pre- and post-operatively. In contrast, cognitive performance differed between the age groups: pre-operatively OA performed worse in most neurocognitive subdomains like working memory (p=0.04), inhibition (p=0.004), processing speed (p=0.003) and mental flexibility (p=0.01), post-operatively MA outperformed OA only in inhibition (p=0.01). Age only slightly influenced cognitive performance in MA, whereas in OA age per se tremendously impacted on working memory (p=0.04), inhibition (p=0.02), memory (p=0.04) and mental flexibility (p=0.01). Educational level also affected processing speed, mental flexibility (p=0.01) and working memory (p=0.01). This was more pronounced in OA. In both age groups, hearing status had a strong effect on attentional tasks (p=0.01). In MA, depressive symptoms were more influential on cognitive functioning and on HR-QoL than in OA. Improvement in quality of life (p=0.0002) and working memory (p=0.001) was greater for those with a higher pre-operative depression score. CONCLUSION: Speech perception and HR-QoL improved in hearing impaired, independently of age. Pre-operative differences in cognitive performance between OA and MA clearly attenuated 12 months after CI. Impact of comorbidities differed between age groups.


Cochlear Implantation/psychology , Cochlear Implants/psychology , Hearing Loss/psychology , Quality of Life/psychology , Aged , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Cognition , Female , Hearing Loss/therapy , Hearing Tests , Humans , Male , Memory, Short-Term , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Speech Perception/physiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
16.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 137 Suppl 1: S11-S18, 2020 Sep.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32863156

OBJECTIVE: Multi-centre study of the National French Registry (EPIIC) of patients with cochlear implants, focusing on infants who were operated-on under the age of 24 months between 2012 and 2016. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 615 profoundly deaf infants, who received cochlear implants (CIs) before their second birthday, were included in the registry by different CI centers. Epidemiological, surgical, speech therapy and school, follow-up data were included in the registry, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months thereafter. The following parameters were studied: type of implantation (uni- or bilateral), complications, cause of deafness, category of auditory perception (CAP), Open-set word recognition score (OSW), speech intelligibility rating, lexical comprehension with EVIP (Peabody), communication mode and type of schooling. Bilateral simultaneous CI (BiCI) and unilateral CI (UniCI) groups were compared. RESULTS: There were 744 implantations. The explantation-reimplantation rate, within the four-year follow-up, was just 3.6%. Mean implantation age was 16.0 months, and similar in the two groups (BiCI/UniCI). A total of 51% of children had their first implant between 12 and 18 months, and 15% before 12 months. Implantation was unilateral in 52% of cases. Fifty-six percent of the bilateral procedures were sequential, with a mean delay of 16.8 months for the second implantation. The cause of deafness was unknown in 52% of cases. Of the 48% (297/615) of attributed cases, 32% had clear genetic causes. The remaining deafness was due to cytomegalovirus (CMV, 8%), inner-ear malformation (5%) and meningitis (3%). The main complications were from infections (47%) and internal device failure (25%). Four years post-operation, 84% of the UniCI and 75% of BiCl groups had a CAP≥5, and 83% of UniCl and 100% BiCI had OSW≥80%. Furthermore 74% of UniCI and 77% of BiCI communicated orally and 85% of UniCI and 90% of BiCI integrated into mainstream schooling. CONCLUSION: The French Registry of cochlear implants (EPIIC) is the only such national registry in the world. Our analysis illustrates the immediate benefits of, either single or double, cochlear implantation for language, perception skills and schooling.


Auditory Perception , Child Language , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Deafness/rehabilitation , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , Cochlear Implantation/adverse effects , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants/adverse effects , Communication , Correction of Hearing Impairment/instrumentation , Correction of Hearing Impairment/statistics & numerical data , Deafness/etiology , Device Removal/statistics & numerical data , Education of Hearing Disabled/methods , Education of Hearing Disabled/statistics & numerical data , Follow-Up Studies , France , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Mainstreaming, Education/statistics & numerical data , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Schools , Speech Intelligibility , Speech Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors
17.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 137 Suppl 1: S5-S9, 2020 Sep.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32891589

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.


Auditory Brain Stem Implants/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Advisory Committees/organization & administration , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Auditory Brain Stem Implants/economics , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/economics , Computer Security , Databases as Topic , Device Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Device Removal/statistics & numerical data , France , Guidelines as Topic/standards , Health Care Sector/economics , Health Care Sector/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement , Quality Control , Reference Standards , Time Factors
18.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 137 Suppl 1: S19-S25, 2020 Sep.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32773333

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the performance of cochlear implants in French patients aged 65 and over, implanted between 2012 and 2016, using data from the French national registry for cochlear implants (EPIIC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The French national registry incorporates patient data from before implantation and for three years after implantation, stratified in different age groups (18-39, 40-64years, 65-74years and>75years). Here, we assessed the latter two categories. Hearing was assessed using mono- and disyllabic words in a silent background. The Category of Auditory Performance (CAP) scale was also implemented and subjects took the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (Aphab) questionnaire. RESULTS: The population aged over 65 accounted for 38% (n=1193) of the 3178 adult implanted patients. The performance for mono- and disyllabic words in silence, the CAP scores and the APHAB questionnaire answers for ease of communication, background noise and reverberation were dramatically improved at one year post-implantation (P<0.0001 for each score) and remained stable between one and three years thereafter. The percentage improvement was similar across all age groups. The scores for loud-noise intolerance did not change after cochlear implantation in any age group. CONCLUSION: Cochlear implants improve hearing and communication in subjects aged 65 and over, with comparable efficiency to that achieved in younger subjects. Cochlear implantation should thus be proposed whenever hearing aids provide only limited benefit. However, between 2012 and 2016, cochlear implantation was given to less than 1% of the French population aged 65 and over with profound deafness.


Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Loss/rehabilitation , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Auditory Perception , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Communication , Female , France , Health Surveys , Hearing Loss/etiology , Hearing Tests/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Noise/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Young Adult
19.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 137 Suppl 1: S57-S63, 2020 Sep.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32792302

This study concerns the results of cochlear implantation in children and adults from French cochlear implantation centers, monitored at one, two and three years by the Cochlear Implant French Registry EPIIC. This multicenter study enrolled 2603 subjects (1667 adults and 936 children) implanted in one ear. The following parameters were studied: hearing overall performances, monosyllabic or dissyllabic word perception, speech intelligibility, self-assessment questionnaire of Cochlear Implant (CI) benefits (Abbreviated profile of Hearing aid Benefit); professional activity and schooling. This study confirms the ceiling effect in adults' performances after the 1st year and the progressive growth in children's performances. It also shows that the contralateral hearing aid enhances performances compared to the CI alone condition, in all follow-up sessions. The French register of CIs is the only worldwide register of systematic follow-up on a period of three years and more of all adults and children implanted in a country.


Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Deafness/rehabilitation , Quality of Life , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Auditory Perception , Child , Child, Preschool , Education , Employment , Follow-Up Studies , France , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Self-Assessment , Speech Intelligibility , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
20.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 137 Suppl 1: S27-S35, 2020 Sep.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32763084

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.


Auditory Brain Stem Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Cochlear Implants/statistics & numerical data , Hearing Loss/rehabilitation , Patient Selection , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Audiometry, Speech/methods , Child , Child, Preschool , Cochlear Implantation/adverse effects , Cochlear Implants/adverse effects , Female , France/epidemiology , Health Surveys , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Off-Label Use/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Period , Preoperative Care , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Young Adult
...