Electric Acoustic Stimulation and Hearing Preservation: Atraumatic Surgical Techniques and Outcome

2012 ◽  
pp. 68-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Heyning ◽  
Griet Mertens ◽  
Andrea Punte
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

scholarly journals Hearing Preservation in Cochlear Implant Surgery

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priscila Carvalho Miranda ◽  
André Luiz Lopes Sampaio ◽  
Rafaela Aquino Fernandes Lopes ◽  
Alessandra Ramos Venosa ◽  
Carlos Augusto Costa Pires de Oliveira
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electrode Design ◽  
High Frequency Region ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
New Treatment

In the past, it was thought that hearing loss patients with residual low-frequency hearing would not be good candidates for cochlear implantation since insertion was expected to induce inner ear trauma. Recent advances in electrode design and surgical techniques have made the preservation of residual low-frequency hearing achievable and desirable. The importance of preserving residual low-frequency hearing cannot be underestimated in light of the added benefit of hearing in noisy atmospheres and in music quality. The concept of electrical and acoustic stimulation involves electrically stimulating the nonfunctional, high-frequency region of the cochlea with a cochlear implant and applying a hearing aid in the low-frequency range. The principle of preserving low-frequency hearing by a “soft surgery” cochlear implantation could also be useful to the population of children who might profit from regenerative hair cell therapy in the future. Main aspects of low-frequency hearing preservation surgery are discussed in this review: its brief history, electrode design, principles and advantages of electric-acoustic stimulation, surgical technique, and further implications of this new treatment possibility for hearing impaired patients.

scholarly journals Preservation of residual hearing after cochlear implant surgery with slim modiolar electrode

2019 ◽  
Vol 277 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matti Iso-Mustajärvi ◽  
Sini Sipari ◽  
Heikki Löppönen ◽  
Aarno Dietz
Keyword(s):  
Low Frequency ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Residual Hearing ◽  
Insertion Depth ◽  
Cochlear Implant Surgery ◽  
Computed Tomography Scans ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the insertion results and hearing preservation of a novel slim modiolar electrode (SME) in patients with residual hearing. Methods We retrospectively collected the data from the medical files of 17 patients (18 ears) implanted with a SME. All patients had functional low frequency hearing (PTA (0.125–0.5 kHz) ≤ 80 dB HL). The insertion results were re-examined from the postoperative cone-beam computed tomography scans. Postoperative thresholds were obtained at the time of switch-on of the sound processors (mean 43 days) and at latest follow-up (mean 582 days). The speech recognition in noise was measured with the Finnish matrix sentence test preoperatively and at follow-up. Results The mean insertion depth angle (IDA) was 395°. Neither scala dislocations nor tip fold over were detected. There were no total hearing losses. Functional low-frequency hearing was preserved in 15/18 (83%) ears at switch-on and in 14/17 (82%) ears at follow-up. According to HEARRING classification, 55% (10/18) had complete HP at switch-on and 41% (7/17) still at follow-up. Thirteen patients (14 ears) were initially fitted with electric–acoustic stimulation and seven patients (8 ears) continued to use it after follow-up. Conclusions The preliminary hearing preservation results with the SME were more favorable than reported for other perimodiolar electrodes. The results show that the array may also be feasible for electro-acoustic stimulation; it is beneficial in that it provides adequate cochlear coverage for pure electrical stimulation in the event of postoperative or progressive hearing loss.

Ipsilateral Electric Acoustic Stimulation of the Auditory System: Results of Long-Term Hearing Preservation

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang K. Gstoettner ◽  
Silke Helbig ◽  
Nicola Maier ◽  
Jan Kiefer ◽  
Andreas Radeloff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Auditory System ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Stimulation Of

scholarly journals Hearing preservation and clinical outcome of 32 consecutive electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) surgeries

2014 ◽  
Vol 134 (7) ◽  
pp. 717-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shin-Ichi Usami ◽  
Hideaki Moteki ◽  
Keita Tsukada ◽  
Maiko Miyagawa ◽  
Shin-Ya Nishio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

scholarly journals Low-Frequency Hearing Preservation With Long Electrode Arrays: Inclusion of Unaided Hearing Threshold Assessment in the Postoperative Test Battery

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Brendan P. O'Connell ◽  
Meredith A. Rooth ◽  
English R. King ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Threshold ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Electrode Array ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electrode Arrays ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity ◽  
Hearing Thresholds ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Initial Activation

Purpose The goal of this work was to evaluate the low-frequency hearing preservation of long electrode array cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Method Twenty-five participants presented with an unaided hearing threshold of ≤ 80 dB HL at 125 Hz pre-operatively in the ear to be implanted. Participants were implanted with a long (31.5-mm) electrode array. The unaided hearing threshold at 125 Hz was compared between the preoperative and postoperative intervals (i.e., initial CI activation, and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after activation). Results Eight participants maintained an unaided hearing threshold of ≤ 80 dB HL at 125 Hz postoperatively. The majority ( n = 5) demonstrated aidable low-frequency hearing at initial activation, whereas 3 other participants experienced an improvement in unaided low-frequency hearing thresholds at subsequent intervals. Conclusions CI recipients can retain residual hearing sensitivity with fully inserted long electrode arrays, and low-frequency hearing thresholds may improve during the postoperative period. Therefore, unaided hearing thresholds obtained within the initial weeks after surgery may not reflect later hearing sensitivity. Routine measurement of postoperative unaided hearing thresholds—even for patients who did not demonstrate aidable hearing thresholds initially after cochlear implantation—will identify CI recipients who may benefit from electric–acoustic stimulation. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.11356637

Long-term Hearing Preservation Outcomes After Cochlear Implantation for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (9) ◽  
pp. e353-e359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silke Helbig ◽  
Youssef Adel ◽  
Tobias Rader ◽  
Timo Stöver ◽  
Uwe Baumann
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

Long-term Follow-up of Hearing Preservation in Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Patients

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. 1765-1772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Griet Mertens ◽  
Andrea Kleine Punte ◽  
Ellen Cochet ◽  
Marc De Bodt ◽  
Paul Van de Heyning
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

scholarly journals Cochlear Implantation in Elderly Patients with Residual Hearing

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 4305
Author(s):  
Farnaz Matin ◽  
Eralp-Niyazi Artukarslan ◽  
Angelika Illg ◽  
Anke Lesinski-Schiedat ◽  
Thomas Lenarz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Speech Comprehension ◽  
Residual Hearing ◽  
Hearing Thresholds ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
System Benefit ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

This retrospective study aimed to investigate the range of hearing levels in a cochlear implant (CI) elderly population receiving electric-acoustic-stimulation (EAS) or electric-stimulation (ES) alone. The investigation evaluates the degree of hearing preservation (HP) and the speech comprehension resulting from EAS or ES-only to identify audiometric factors that predict adequate EAS and ES use. We analyzed the pure tone audiometry and speech perception in quiet and noise preoperatively and 12-months after activation of 89 elderly adults (age of 65 years old or older), yielding in total 97 CIs. Thirty-two (33.1%) patients were potential EAS candidates preoperatively, of which 18 patients used EAS at the time of first fitting and the other 14 patients continued to use their residual hearing for EAS at 12-months. Post-treatment, patients with EAS system and ES-only users’ with longer electrodes showed better results in monosyllable word scores in quiet than ES-only users with shorter electrodes. A similar trend was revealed for the speech recognition in noise. Patients with an EAS system benefit from maintaining their natural residual hearing. Nevertheless, strict preoperative patient selection is warranted particularly in elderly patients, in whom the hearing thresholds for EAS indication differ slightly from that in younger adults.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document