For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
1
views
20
references
 Top references
cited by
0
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      102
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Comparison of Surgical Auditory Nerve Response and Speech Outcomes in Patients with Post-meningitic Deafness and Without Cochlear Osteogenesis Who Underwent Cochlear Implantation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Patients with post-meningitis deafness remain challenging candidates for cochlear implantation (CI) which can be difficult due to fibrosis or ossification of the inner ear, and their outcomes remain doubtful. We assessed the surgical and audiological outcomes of CI in patients with profound sensorineural hearing loss caused by meningitis and compared those outcomes to patients without cochlear ossification.

          Methods

          This retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out at King Fahad General Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Among 246 patients who underwent cochlear implantation, 13 patients with post-meningitic deafness were identified (Group 1). A matched control group, including patients with deafness due to other causes who did not have cochlea osteogenesis, was selected (Group 2). For all patients, data were collected from medical records, including surgical and audiological outcomes.

          Results

          Sclerosis of the cochlea was high in Group 1 (46.2%). There were no postoperative surgical complications in either group. Responses of the auditory nerve action potential obtained through auditory response telemetry (ART) or the neural response telemetry (NRT) were recorded. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the intraoperative and the postoperative ART or NRT at selected electrodes representing the entire cochlea. Likewise, no significant difference regarding the speech recognition test (SRT) was detected.

          Conclusions

          Cochlear implantation is a safe procedure without surgical complications in post-meningitis patients. Furthermore, early CI in children was associated with favorable outcomes in terms of preservation of the auditory nerve response, restoration of speech discrimination, and recognition to levels comparable to patients with deafness due to other causes. Early audiological assessment in meningitis patients is recommended to identify hearing loss and eventually to offer CI.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cochlear implants for severe to profound deafness in children and adults: a systematic review and economic model.

          Dylan Z. Liu, S Mealing, Steve J Elston … (2009)
          To investigate whether it is clinically effective and cost-effective to provide (i) a unilateral cochlear implant for severely to profoundly deaf people (using or not using hearing aids), and (ii) a bilateral cochlear implant for severely to profoundly deaf people with a single cochlear implant (unilateral or unilateral plus hearing aid). Main electronic databases [MEDLINE; EMBASE; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; CENTRAL; NHS EED; DARE; HTA (NHS-CRD); EconLit; National Research Register; and ClinicalTrials.gov] searched in October 2006, updated July 2007. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken according to standard methods. A state-transition (Markov) model of the main care pathways deaf people might follow and the main complications and device failures was developed. The clinical effectiveness review included 33 papers, of which only two were RCTs. They used 62 different outcome measures and overall were of moderate to poor quality. All studies in children comparing one cochlear implant with non-technological support or an acoustic hearing aid reported gains on all outcome measures, some demonstrating greater gain from earlier implantation. The strongest evidence for an advantage from bilateral over unilateral implantation was for understanding speech in noisy conditions (mean improvement 13.2%, p < 0.0001); those receiving their second implant earlier made greater gains. Comparison of bilateral with unilateral cochlear implants plus an acoustic hearing aid was compromised by small sample sizes and poor reporting, but benefits were seen with bilateral implants. Cochlear implants improved children's quality of life, and those who were implanted before attending school were more likely to do well academically and attend mainstream education than those implanted later. In adults, there was a greater benefit from cochlear implants than from non-technological support in terms of speech perception. Increased age at implantation may reduce effectiveness and there is a negative correlation between duration of deafness and effectiveness. Speech perception measures all showed benefits for cochlear implants over acoustic hearing aids [e.g. mean increase in score of 37 points in noisy conditions (p < 0.001) with BKB sentences]; however, prelingually deafened adults benefited less than those postlingually deafened (mean change scores 20% versus 62%). For unilateral versus bilateral implantation, benefits in speech perception were significant in noisy conditions on all measures [e.g. 76% for HINT sentences (p < 0.0001)]. Quality of life measured with generic and disease-specific instruments or by interview mostly showed significant gains or positive trends from using cochlear implants. The Markov model base-case analysis estimated that, for prelingually profoundly deaf children, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for unilateral implantation compared with no implantation was 13,413 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming the utility gain for bilateral implantation is the same for adults and children, the ICERs for simultaneous and sequential bilateral implantation versus unilateral implantation were 40,410 pounds and 54,098 pounds per QALY respectively. For postlingually sensorineurally profoundly deaf adults, the corresponding ICERs were 14,163 pounds, 49,559 pounds and 60,301 pounds per QALY respectively. Probabilistic threshold analyses suggest that unilateral implants are highly likely to be cost-effective for adults and children at willingness to pay thresholds of 20,000 pounds or 30,000 pounds per QALY. There are likely to be overall additional benefits from bilateral implantation, enabling children and adults to hold conversations more easily in social situations. Unilateral cochlear implantation is safe and effective for adults and children and likely to be cost-effective in profoundly deaf adults and profoundly and prelingually deaf children. However, decisions on the cost-effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants should take into account the high degree of uncertainty within the model regarding the probable utility gain.
          Article 0 comments Cited 46 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sensorineural hearing loss in postmeningitic children.

            Mark Wellman, Doron Sommer, T Joseph McKenna (2003)
            To establish the proportion of children who develop sensorineural hearing loss after bacterial meningitis and to correlate such loss with patient factors.
            Article 0 comments Cited 15 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Hearing impairment after bacterial meningitis: a review.

              H Fortnum (1992)
              Article 0 comments Cited 15 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Cureus
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Cureus
                Journal ID (issn): 2168-8184
                Title: Cureus
                Publisher: Cureus (Palo Alto (CA) )
                ISSN (Electronic): 2168-8184
                Publication date (Electronic, pub): 13 September 2019
                Publication date (Electronic, collection): September 2019
                Volume: 11
                Issue: 9
                Affiliations
                [1 ] ENT and Cochlear Implant Center, Royal Commission Hospital, Jubail, SAU
                [2 ] Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department, King Fahad Hospital, Jeddah, SAU
                [3 ] Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, SAU
                [4 ] Otolaryngology Department, University of Jeddah, Jeddah, SAU
                Author notes
                Article
                DOI: 10.7759/cureus.5650
                PMC ID: 6822895
                SO-VID: 3fc8abca-d298-44fd-afb7-c187611f61cd
                Copyright statement: Copyright © 2019, Alshaikh et al.
                License:

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                Date received : 18 July 2019
                Date accepted : 11 September 2019
                Product
                Self URI: This article is available from https://www.cureus.com/articles/21596-a-comparison-of-surgical-auditory-nerve-response-and-speech-outcomes-in-patients-with-post-meningitic-deafness-and-without-cochlear-osteogenesis-who-underwent-cochlear-implantation
                Categories
                Subject: Otolaryngology

                Keywords: cochlear implantation,meningitis,sensory neural deafness,cochlear sclerosis,speech recognition threshold
                Data availability:
                Keywords: cochlear implantation, meningitis, sensory neural deafness, cochlear sclerosis, speech recognition threshold

                Comments

                Comment on this article