Is there a best side for cochlear implants in post-lingual patients?

Retrospective longitudinal study. Participants were 40 subjects, of both sex, mean age of 47 years, with post-lingual hearing loss, users of unilateral cochlear implant for more than 12 months and less than 24 months, with asymmetric auditor reserve between the ears (difference of 10 dBNA, In at least one of the frequencies with a response, between the ears), divided into two groups. Group A was composed of individuals with cochlear implant in the ear with better auditory reserve and Group B with auditory reserve lower in relation to the contralateral side.

Results:

There was no statistical difference for the tonal auditory threshold before and after cochlear implant. A better speech perception in pre-cochlear implant tests was present in B (20%), but the final results are similar in both groups.

Conclusion:

The cochlear implant in the ear with the worst auditory residue favors a bimodal hearing, which would allow the binaural summation, without compromising the improvement of the audiometric threshold and the speech perception.

KEYWORDS
Cochlear implant; Hearing; Speech perception; Sound deprivation; Auditory residue

Group	Pre-CI	Post-CI	Gain	p-value
A - Best	104.2 ± 11.2	33.2 ± 8.0	71.1 ± 16.7	<0.0001^b b Comparison between pre- and post-CI - Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Sum Test.
B - Worst	106.4 ± 12.2	31.2 ± 10.0	75.2 ± 16.0	<0.0001^b b Comparison between pre- and post-CI - Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Sum Test.
p-values	0.468^a a Comparison between groups, Mann-Whitney test.	0.492^a a Comparison between groups, Mann-Whitney test.	0.505^a a Comparison between groups, Mann-Whitney test.

Hearing deprivation time of the best implanted side	Patients with hearing deprivation time shorter than or equal to 10 years	Patients with hearing deprivation time longer than 10 years	p-value (comparison between the two hearing deprivation times)
Average at 500 Hz pre-CI	106 dB	102.22 dB	0.7525
Average at 500 Hz post-CI	34.4 dB	31.66 dB	0.2962
Gain at 500 Hz	71.6 dB	70.56 dB	0.7543
Speech Perception Test - pre-CI - trisyllable words	0%	16%	0.0585
Speech Perception Test - post-CI - trisyllable words	91.11%	77.71%	0.2051
Speech Gain	91.11%	61.71%	0.0125

Hearing deprivation time of the worst side for implant	Patients with hearing deprivation time less than or equal to 10 years	Patients with hearing deprivation time more than 10 years	p-value (comparison between the two hearing deprivation times)
Average at 500 Hz pre-CI	104.23 dB	110 dB	0.1393
Average at 500 Hz post-CI	28.07 dB	36.25 dB	0.0784
Gain at 500 Hz	76.16 dB	73.75 dB	0.7708
Speech Perception Test - pre-CI - trisyllable words	25%	9%	0.2038
Speech Perception Test - post-CI - trisyllable words	90%	70.85%	0.0130
Speech Gain	65%	61.85%	1.0000

Hearing deprivation time of the worst side implanted	Less than or equal to 10 years	More than 10 years	p-value (comparison between the two hearing deprivation times)
Average Auditory Level at frequencies 500-4000 Hz, pre-CI, in dB	111.38	111.38	0.1768
Average Auditory Level at frequencies 500-4000 Hz, post-CI, in dB	28.15	35.5	0.0352
Mean gain	82.23	75.88	0.5137

Hearing deprivation time of the best side implanted	Less than or equal to 10 years	More than 10 years	p-value (comparison between the two hearing deprivation times)
Average Auditory Level at frequencies 500-4000 Hz, pre-CI, in dB	112.91	108.88	0.4738
Average Auditory Level at frequencies 500-4000 Hz, post-CI, in dB	32.73	30.63	0.4751
Mean gain	80.18	78.25	0.8237

Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. Sede da Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico Facial, Av. Indianópolia, 1287, 04063-002 São Paulo/SP Brasil, Tel.: (0xx11) 5053-7500, Fax: (0xx11) 5053-7512 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista@aborlccf.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author. E-mail:mahyppo@fmrp.usp.br (M.A. Hyppolito).

Brasil

Brasil

Is there a best side for cochlear implants in post-lingual patients?☆ ☆ Please cite this article as: Amaral MS, Damico TA, Gonçales AS, Reis AC, Isaac ML, Massuda ET, et al. Is there a best side for cochlear implants in post-lingual patients? Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;84:560-65.

Abstract

Introduction:

Objective:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Is there a best side for cochlear implants in post-lingual patients?^☆ ☆ Please cite this article as: Amaral MS, Damico TA, Gonçales AS, Reis AC, Isaac ML, Massuda ET, et al. Is there a best side for cochlear implants in post-lingual patients? Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;84:560-65.