Evaluation of Outcome Variability Associated With Lateral Wall, Mid-scalar, and Perimodiolar Electrode Arrays When Controlling for Preoperative Patient Characteristics.

Clicks: 224
ID: 96451
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality Improving Quality
0.0 /100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
Determine the impact of electrode array selection on audiometric performance when controlling for baseline patient characteristics.Retrospective evaluation of a prospective cochlear implant (CI) database (January 1, 2012-May 31, 2017).Tertiary Care University Hospital.Three hundred twenty-eight adult CI recipients.Hearing outcomes were measured through unaided/aided pure tone thresholds and speech recognition testing before and after cochlear implantation. All reported postoperative results were performed at least 6 months after CI activation. All device manufacturers were represented.Of the 328 patients, 234 received lateral wall (LW) arrays, 46 received perimodiolar (PM) arrays, and 48 received mid-scalar (MS) arrays. Patients receiving PM arrays had significantly poorer preoperative earphone and aided PTAs and SRTs, and aided Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant(CNC) word and AzBio +10 SNR scores compared with patients receiving LW arrays (all pā€Šā‰¤ā€Š0.04), and poorer PTAs and AzBio +10 SNR scores compared with MS recipients (all pā€Šā‰¤ā€Š0.02). No preoperative audiological variables were found to significantly differ between MS and LW patients. After controlling for preoperative residual hearing and speech recognition ability in a hierarchical multiple regression analysis, no statistically significant difference in audiological outcomes was detected (CNC words, AzBio quiet, or AzBio +10 SNR) among the three electrode array types (all pā€Š>ā€Š0.05).While previous studies have demonstrated superior postoperative speech recognition scores in LW electrode array recipients, these differences lose significance when controlling for baseline hearing and speech recognition ability. These data demonstrate the proclivity for implanting individuals with greater residual hearing with LW electrodes and its impact on postoperative results.
Reference Key
fabie2018evaluationotology Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Fabie, Joshua E;Keller, Robert G;Hatch, Jonathan L;Holcomb, Meredith A;Camposeo, Elizabeth L;Lambert, Paul R;Meyer, Ted A;McRackan, Theodore R;
Journal otology & neurotology : official publication of the american otological society, american neurotology society [and] european academy of otology and neurotology
Year 2018
DOI 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001951
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.