Cargando…

Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?

PURPOSE: To determine hearing preservation and subjective benefit after cochlear implant (CI) surgery in patients with low frequency hearing in the ear to be implanted (i.e., they have partial deafness, PD) and close to normal hearing in the other. METHODS: There were two study groups. The test grou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lorens, Artur, Skarzynski, Piotr Henryk, Obrycka, Anita, Skarzynski, Henryk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37221309
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08011-y
_version_ 1785118105711673344
author Lorens, Artur
Skarzynski, Piotr Henryk
Obrycka, Anita
Skarzynski, Henryk
author_facet Lorens, Artur
Skarzynski, Piotr Henryk
Obrycka, Anita
Skarzynski, Henryk
author_sort Lorens, Artur
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To determine hearing preservation and subjective benefit after cochlear implant (CI) surgery in patients with low frequency hearing in the ear to be implanted (i.e., they have partial deafness, PD) and close to normal hearing in the other. METHODS: There were two study groups. The test group was made up of 12 adult patients (mean age 43.4 years; SD 13.6) with normal hearing or mild hearing loss in one ear, and with PD in the ear to be implanted. The reference group consisted of 12 adult patients (mean age 44.5 years; SD 14.1) who had PD in both ears and who underwent unilateral implantation in their worse ear. Hearing preservation was assessed 1 and 14 months after CI surgery using the Skarzynski Hearing Preservation Classification System. The APHAB questionnaire was used to evaluate the benefit from the CI. RESULTS: The differences in HP% between the groups were not significant: mean hearing preservation (HP%) in the test group was 82% one month after CI surgery and 75% some 14 months after implantation; corresponding results in the reference group were 71% and 69%. However, on the APHAB background noise subscale, the benefit in the test group was significantly larger than in the reference group. CONCLUSION: To a large extent it was possible to preserve low-frequency hearing in the implanted ear. This means that individuals with low frequency hearing in the implanted ear (partial deafness) and with normal hearing in the other generally received more benefits from cochlear implantation than did patients with partial deafness in both ears. We conclude that residual low frequency hearing in the ear to be implanted should not be considered a contraindication for a CI in a patient with single-sided deafness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10562342
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105623422023-10-11 Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear? Lorens, Artur Skarzynski, Piotr Henryk Obrycka, Anita Skarzynski, Henryk Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Otology PURPOSE: To determine hearing preservation and subjective benefit after cochlear implant (CI) surgery in patients with low frequency hearing in the ear to be implanted (i.e., they have partial deafness, PD) and close to normal hearing in the other. METHODS: There were two study groups. The test group was made up of 12 adult patients (mean age 43.4 years; SD 13.6) with normal hearing or mild hearing loss in one ear, and with PD in the ear to be implanted. The reference group consisted of 12 adult patients (mean age 44.5 years; SD 14.1) who had PD in both ears and who underwent unilateral implantation in their worse ear. Hearing preservation was assessed 1 and 14 months after CI surgery using the Skarzynski Hearing Preservation Classification System. The APHAB questionnaire was used to evaluate the benefit from the CI. RESULTS: The differences in HP% between the groups were not significant: mean hearing preservation (HP%) in the test group was 82% one month after CI surgery and 75% some 14 months after implantation; corresponding results in the reference group were 71% and 69%. However, on the APHAB background noise subscale, the benefit in the test group was significantly larger than in the reference group. CONCLUSION: To a large extent it was possible to preserve low-frequency hearing in the implanted ear. This means that individuals with low frequency hearing in the implanted ear (partial deafness) and with normal hearing in the other generally received more benefits from cochlear implantation than did patients with partial deafness in both ears. We conclude that residual low frequency hearing in the ear to be implanted should not be considered a contraindication for a CI in a patient with single-sided deafness. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-05-24 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10562342/ /pubmed/37221309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08011-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Otology
Lorens, Artur
Skarzynski, Piotr Henryk
Obrycka, Anita
Skarzynski, Henryk
Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
title Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
title_full Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
title_fullStr Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
title_full_unstemmed Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
title_short Can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
title_sort can an individual with low frequency hearing in the candidate ear benefit from a cochlear implant even if they have normal hearing in the other ear?
topic Otology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37221309
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08011-y
work_keys_str_mv AT lorensartur cananindividualwithlowfrequencyhearinginthecandidateearbenefitfromacochlearimplanteveniftheyhavenormalhearingintheotherear
AT skarzynskipiotrhenryk cananindividualwithlowfrequencyhearinginthecandidateearbenefitfromacochlearimplanteveniftheyhavenormalhearingintheotherear
AT obryckaanita cananindividualwithlowfrequencyhearinginthecandidateearbenefitfromacochlearimplanteveniftheyhavenormalhearingintheotherear
AT skarzynskihenryk cananindividualwithlowfrequencyhearinginthecandidateearbenefitfromacochlearimplanteveniftheyhavenormalhearingintheotherear