Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To assess the safety of cochlear implants (CIs) in children under 9 months of age to better understand expected postoperative complication rates, and to provide a preliminary look at efficacy. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Single-center retrospective review. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS/METHODS:Children 5 to 8 months of age who received a CI between 2011 and 2021. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Therapeutic-CI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:The primary outcome was 6-month postoperative complication rate. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, device explantation/reimplantation, rehabilitation supports, and hearing and language outcomes. Complications of children implanted under than 9 months of age was compared with a cohort of children implanted 9 to 18 months of age between the years 2011 and 2016 using a chi-squared test (p < 0.05). RESULTS:One hundred six children under 9 months of age were implanted (204 CIs) at a mean age of 6.6 months (range: 5-8). Postoperative complications occurred in 28 patients (26%) and were often minor. There were no mortalities. There was no statistically significant difference in complications, including reimplantation rates, between patients implanted under 9 months of age and those implanted 9 to 18 months of age. Speech discrimination outcomes were excellent, and mean spoken language outcomes were near normative for typically developing children. CONCLUSIONS:Cochlear implantation can be a safe and effective treatment option for children 5 to 8 months of age. Early hearing screening and referral for infants to receive appropriate intervention will continue to play a critical role in optimizing speech and language outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Single-sided deafness (SSD) can have consequences for a child's language, educational, and social development. A cochlear implant (CI) is the only device which can restore true binaural hearing, yet they are only approved for children with (SSD) over the age of five in the United States. Reports on speech perception outcomes for children implanted at a younger age are limited. The present study aims to examine the effects of age at implantation, duration of deafness, hearing loss etiology, and presence of additional disabilities on device usage and speech perception outcomes. METHODS:A retrospective chart review was used to examine demographics and speech perception outcomes for 18 children implanted at age five or younger. RESULTS:Speech perception results were highly variable, with some children deriving significant benefit and others demonstrating no sound awareness through the implant alone. Age at implantation and duration of deafness did not have a clear impact on outcomes. Device usage was low in many children, often those with anatomical abnormalities such as a hypoplastic cochlear nerve. There are challenges to assessing speech perception in young children with SSD, leading to a lack of standardized outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS:Early CI for children with SSD may improve speech perception, but benefit is not guaranteed. Candidacy evaluation should consider both medical and audiological factors, in addition to the degree of family support and realistic expectations. Caution is especially warranted in children with significant anatomical anomalies.

OBJECTIVE:Children with high-frequency severe-to-profound hearing loss and low-frequency residual hearing who do not derive significant benefit from hearing aids are now being considered for cochlear implantation. Previous research shows that hearing preservation is possible and may be desirable for the use of electroacoustic stimulation (EAS) in adults, but this topic remains underexplored in children. The goal of this study was to explore factors relating to hearing preservation, acceptance, and benefits of EAS for children. STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective review. SETTING:Tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS:Forty children (48 ears) with preoperative low-frequency pure-tone averages of 75 dB HL or less at 250 and 500 Hz (n = 48). INTERVENTION:All patients underwent cochlear implantation with a standard-length electrode. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:Low-frequency audiometric thresholds, speech perception, and EAS usage were measured at initial stimulation, and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Outcomes were compared between children with and without hearing preservation, and between EAS users and nonusers. RESULTS:Hearing was preserved at similar rates as adults but worse for children with an enlarged vestibular aqueduct. Fewer than half of children who qualified to use EAS chose to do so, citing a variety of audiologic and nonaudiologic reasons. No differences were detected in speech perception scores across the groups for words, sentences, or sentences in noise tests. CONCLUSIONS:Neither hearing preservation nor EAS use resulted in superior speech perception in children with preoperative residual hearing; rather, all children performed well after implantation.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:Cochlear implants (CIs) provide access to sound for children and adults who do not receive adequate benefit from hearing aids. Age at implantation is known to affect outcomes across the lifespan. AREAS COVERED/UNASSIGNED:The effects of age on CI outcomes are examined for infants, children, adolescents, and older adults. A variety of outcome measures are considered, including speech perception, language, cognition, and quality of life measures. EXPERT OPINION/COMMENTARY/UNASSIGNED:For those meeting candidacy criteria, CIs are beneficial at any age. In general, younger age is related to greater benefit when considering pre-lingual deafness. Other factors such as additional disabilities, may mitigate this effect. Post-lingually deafened adults demonstrate similar benefit regardless of age, though the oldest individuals (80+) may see smaller degrees of improvement from preoperative scores. Benefit can be measured in many ways, and the areas of greatest benefit may vary based on age: young children appear to see the greatest effects of age at implantation on language measures, whereas scores on cognitive measures appear to be most impacted for the oldest population. Future research should consider implantation at extreme ages (5-9 months or > 90 years), unconventional measures of CI benefit including qualitative assessments, and longitudinal designs.

OBJECTIVE:To prospectively evaluate the frailty phenotype in a population of older adults and determine its association with 1) perioperative complications, 2) need for vestibular rehabilitation after surgery, and 3) early speech perception outcomes. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective cohort study. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS/METHODS:Adults older than 65 years undergoing cochlear implantation. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:The Fried Frailty Index was used to classify patients as frail, prefrail, or not frail based on five criteria: 1) gait speed, 2) grip strength, 3) unintentional weight loss, 4) weekly physical activity, and 5) self-reported exhaustion. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES/METHODS:Rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative falls, need for vestibular rehabilitation, and early speech perception outcomes. RESULTS:Forty-six patients were enrolled in this study. Five patients (10.8%) were categorized as frail and 10 (21.7%) as prefrail. The mean ages of frail, prefrail, and not frail patients were 80.9, 78.8, and 77.5, respectively. There were no intraoperative complications among all groups. Three patients required postoperative vestibular rehabilitation; all were not frail. One postoperative fall occurred in a nonfrail individual. Mean (standard deviation) device use times at 3 months in frail, prefrail, and not frail patients were 7.6 (3.5), 11.1 (3.6), and 11.6 (2.9) hours per day, respectively. Consonant-nucleus-consonant word scores 3 months after surgery in frail, prefrail, and not frail patients were 13% (12.2), 44% (19.7), and 51% (22.4), respectively. The median (range) number of missed follow-up visits (surgeon, audiologist, speech language pathologist combined) was 7 (1-10) in frail patients, compared with a median of 3 (0-4) and 2 (0-5) in prefrail and not frail patients. CONCLUSIONS:Frail patients did not have increased rates of surgical complications, need for vestibular rehabilitation, or postoperative falls. However, frail patients experienced challenges in accessing postoperative care, which may be addressed by using remote programming and rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Evaluate rates of Advanced Bionics Ultra 3D/Ultra cochlear implant failure in the setting of a worldwide device recall and report surgical and auditory outcomes after revision. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective chart review was performed for adult and pediatric patients implanted with at risk devices at our center from 2016 to 2020. Device failure rates, surgical, and auditory outcomes were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = 0.95). DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:Patients with device failure due to this field action performed well after revision implantation. Patients with bilateral at-risk devices but evidence of unilateral failure may elect to undergo simultaneous empiric revision of the contralateral device. Three patients who elected to change device manufacturers on revision have variable results that require further investigation. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Patients requiring revision for a device field action overall perform well. At-risk devices continue to require monitoring as a growing number are likely to fail over time.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the ability of the transimpedance matrix (TIM) measurement to detect cochlear implant electrode tip foldover by comparing results to a "gold standard," the intraoperative plain film radiograph. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective case series. SETTING/METHODS:Tertiary referral hospital. PATIENTS/METHODS:One hundred three patients who underwent cochlear implantation between June 2020 and August 2021. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Intraoperative electrophysiologic monitoring (electrode impedances, neural response telemetry, and TIM measurement) and modified Stenver's view plain film radiographs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Identification of tip foldover on both TIM and plain films. RESULTS:In total, 103 patients (117 ears) had both a TIM measurement and intraoperative X-ray available for review, including 68 adults and 35 children. One hundred patients (85%) received the Cochlear Slim Modiolar electrode. Tip foldovers were noted in three of 117 implants (2.5%). In all cases, TIM was able to detect the foldover, and the electrode arrays were reinserted with the patients still under anesthesia, with repeat X-ray demonstrating a normal configuration. Two other abnormal TIM patterns were identified. One was in a patient with an obstructed cochlea in whom only 10 electrodes could be inserted, the other was in a patient with a common cavity abnormality. One additional patient underwent electrode repositioning intraoperatively because of overinsertion. In this patient, the TIM appeared to be within normal limits, but the over-insertion was apparent on X-ray. Overall, the sensitivity and specificity of TIM measurements in detecting electrode tip foldover were both 100%. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:TIM measurements were able to accurately identify tip foldovers. More research is needed to define the adjunctive role of TIM as an intraoperative measure.

OBJECTIVES:The current study aimed to identify and map the available evidence surrounding cochlear implantation (CI) in older adults. Five outcomes were evaluated: speech perception scores, perioperative complications, neurocognitive outcomes, quality of life outcomes and vestibular dysfunction and fall rates after surgery. METHODS:A scoping review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews and included patients over the age of 60. RESULTS:Ninety-seven studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 7,182 patients. Mean (SD) speech perception scores in quiet and in noise pre-and postoperatively were 7.9% (6.7) and 52.8% (14.3) and 8.0% (68.1) and 68.1% (15.9) respectively. Postoperative cardiac arrhythmias, urinary retention, and delirium occurred slightly more frequently in older adults. In terms of cognition, most studies noted stability or improvement one year after implantation. A majority of studies indicated better quality of life post-CI. Rates of fall after surgery were rarely reported, and there was a general paucity of data surrounding vestibular function changes after CI. DISCUSSION:This scoping review identifies many positive outcomes linked to CI in older adults. No findings suggest a single patient characteristic that would warrant refusal to consider evaluation for cochlear implantation.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate outcomes of auditory implants in children with CHARGE syndrome and describe the evolution in management of hearing loss in this complex population. METHODS:A retrospective case review was performed at a tertiary referral center. Children with CHARGE syndrome who received either a cochlear implant (CI) or auditory brainstem implant (ABI) were included. Clinical records, demographic information, CHARGE features, neuroimaging, audiology, hearing rehabilitation interventions, operative notes, and outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS:Thirteen children with CHARGE syndrome underwent a total of 19 cochlear implants between 2008 and 2020. Among the congenitally deafened children (n = 9), six underwent bilateral implantation (five simultaneous and one sequential). Bilateral implantation was performed even in the presence of diminutive-appearing cochlear nerves. The average age of implantation was 1.1 years, and the mean device use time was 9.4 hours per day. Patients showed improvements in subjective family assessment related to hearing. In this group, two patients use oral communication, five use total communication, and two use sign language exclusively. Among the children with progressive hearing loss, the mean age of hearing deterioration was 4.4 years of age, and the device use time on average was 9.8 hours per day. The highest performer in the cohort was a child who lost hearing in their only hearing ear at age 4 and had normal cochleovestibular anatomy on that side. One child received an auditory brainstem implant at age two after deriving no benefit from a CI and can detect environmental sounds but is currently a nonuser. Over time, we noted that implantation occurred earlier in life and that practice has shifted toward bilateral implantation. CONCLUSIONS:Compared to a previous institutional cohort, children evaluated in this study were often implanted at a younger age and bilaterally with significantly improved outcomes. A CI evaluation should be considered in children with CHARGE syndrome to maximize sensory input and auditory ability.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Severe hearing loss is particularly prevalent among Veterans. In response, the Veterans Affairs (VA) provides hearing aids and cochlear implants as part of their comprehensive hearing loss treatment. The VA's national health care system and integrated electronic health records offer a unique opportunity to examine patterns and outcomes in the management of severe hearing loss. METHOD/METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed an urban VA center's database for all Veterans who underwent cochlear implantation between 2010 and 2019. We collected preoperative demographic and audiological data including cochlear implant outcomes. RESULTS:During the study period, 61 Veterans received a cochlear implant, totaling 70 ears implanted. Median age at implantation was 70.2 years. Over 90% of Veterans reported preoperative hearing aid use, and median preoperative four-frequency pure-tone average and aided word recognition score in the ear to be implanted were 100 dB HL and 7%, respectively. The median onset of severe hearing loss bilaterally was over 4 years prior to cochlear implant evaluation based on available audiometric data. Postoperative word recognition score was negatively correlated with self-reported duration of hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS:This study provides unique insights into how Veterans with severe hearing loss are managed at one VA center. Compared to data published on cochlear implant recipients in the civilian population, Veterans in this cohort were older and had higher rates of preoperative hearing aid use. Available VA data suggest most Veterans were appropriate candidates for cochlear implant referral years prior to undergoing an evaluation. Reasons for treatment delays in this population remain to be studied.