2004 2岁前耳蜗植入的结果分析

  • 格式:pdf
  • 大小:96.87 KB
  • 文档页数:7

InternationalJournalofPediatricOtorhinolaryngology(2004)68,425—431Cochlearimplantationinchildrenundertheageoftwo–—whatdotheoutcomesshowus?

IlonaAndersona,*,ViktorWeichboldb,PatrickS.C.D’Haesea,

JoannaSzuchnikc,ManuelSainzQuevedod,JaneMartine,

WafaaShehataDielerf,LucyPhillipsg

aClinicalResearchDepartment,MED-ELWorldwideHeadquarters,Innsbruck,Austria

bDepartmentofHearing,VoiceandSpeechDisorders,UniversityHospital,Innsbruck,Austria

cInstituteofPhysiologyandPathologyofHearing,Warsaw,Poland

dHospitalUniversitario‘‘SanCecilio’’deGranada,Granada,Spain

eYorkshireCochlearImplantService,Bradford,UK

fUniversitätsHNO-KlinikWürzburg,Würzburg,Germany

gBridgendCochlearImplantProgramme,Bridgend,Wales,UK

Received29July2003;receivedinrevisedform12November2003;accepted19November2003

KEYWORDSEARS;Auditoryperception;Cochlearimplant;Earlyimplantation

SummaryObjective:Literaturethatdiscussesthebenefitsofcochlearimplantation(CI)inchildrenundertheageoftwoislimited.Previousconcernsaboutsurgicalriskhavebeenraisedandaddressed;however,actualbenefitintermsofoutcomesneedstobeclearlydefined.Thisstudyevaluatesoutcomesofchildrenimplantedundertheageoftwoandcomparesthemtochildrenimplantedatalaterage.Methods:DatawerereviewedfromtheMED-ELInternationalChildren’sstudydatabase.Thirty-sevenchildrenenrolledinthestudyhavereceivedcochlearimplantsbeforetheageoftwo.OutcomeswereassessedusingtheLiPandMTPtestsandtheMAISandMUSSques-tionnairespre-operativelyandthenatinitialfitting,1,3,6and12monthsafterfirstfittingandthenannuallythereafter.Results:Statisticalanalysisdemonstratedthatthesechildren’sscoresimprovedsignificantlyovertime.ImprovementwasshowntooccurataquickerratethanforchildrenimplantedatanolderagewiththeMTPandMUSS,butnotwiththeLiPandtheMAIS.Scoresmaybelimitedbysamplesizeandthefactthatchildrenreachedceilingonsometests.Conclusions:Resultssuggestadistinctadvantageearlyimplantationmayhaveforseveretoprofoundlyhearingim-pairedchildren.Thismaybeparticularlythecaseforskillsnecessaryfordevelopmentofreceptiveandexpressivelanguageskills.©2003ElsevierIrelandLtd.Allrightsreserved.

1.IntroductionTheadventofuniversalneonatalhearingscreeninghaschangedthewaywethinkabout,diagnoseand

*Correspondingauthor.Tel.:+43-512-288889-543;

fax:+43-512-293381.E-mailaddress:ilona.anderson@medel.com(I.Anderson).

managethehearingimpairedchild.Issueshavebeenraisedabouthowwedeterminedegreeandtypeofhearingloss;whataretheeffectiveassess-mentmeasuresthatwillprovideacomprehensiveandholisticoverviewofinfants’hearingabilities;andwhatisthebestandmostappropriatewaytomanagechildrendiagnosedwithahearingloss.Inthecaseofchildrenwithseveretoprofound

0165-5876/$—seefrontmatter©2003ElsevierIrelandLtd.Allrightsreserved.doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2003.11.013426I.Andersonetal.hearingloss,isthecochlearimplantasuitablemanagementmeans?Ifso,howcanwedeterminebeyonddoubtthedegreeofhearinglossandlackofbenefitgainedfromhearingaids?Howcanwetellwhetherimplantationinsuchyoungchildrenisthemostappropriateoption?Lenarz[1]suggeststhatcochlearimplantation(CI)shouldbeperformedwithinthefirsttwoyearsoflife.Traditionally,onlythosechildrenwithanae-tiologyofmeningitiswereconsideredforimplanta-tionatsuchayoungage.Thiswastopreventtheonsetofossificationaffectingelectrodeinsertion.Now,FoodandDrugAdministrationguidelinesper-mitimplantationinchildrenfrom12monthsofage,whohavesevere-to-profoundhearingloss.[2]Thegreatestconcernsaboutimplantinginfantshavetodowithsurgicalrisk.Thesurgicaltechniqueissimilartothatintheolderchildren[3].Issuescenteredonthethicknessoftheskull,exposureofthedura[4]andtheanaestheticriskareofconcern[3,5].Provingthedegreeofhearinglossandlackofbenefitfromamplificationarefurtherchallengestotheimplantteam,yetthisisoftenmanagedwithabatteryofaudiologicaltests[6].Despitetheabovesurgical,anaestheticandaudiologicalissues,outcomescoresforchildrenimplantedatanearlyagearequitefavourable.Matchedgroupsofchildrenimplantedatsixdif-ferentageshavebeencompared[7].Childrenim-plantedundertheageof3performedbetterthanthoseimplantedatlaterages;bothonopenandclosed-setspeechrecognitiontests.Theauthors’clinicalobservationssuggestthatthegroupofchil-drenimplantedundertheageof3hadbettervoicecontrol,auditoryattentionandinteractionwithparents.Baumgartneretal[8]foundthatchildrenimplantedundertheageof3performedsignifi-cantlybetterthanthoseimplantedovertheageof3,basedonresultsfromtheevaluationofauditoryresponsestospeech(EARS)testbattery.Inanoverviewof73childrenimplantedundertheageoffiveyears,childrenimplantedundertheageof3showedexcellentscoresonreceptivelan-guageskillsandperformedbetteronexpressivelan-guageskillsthantheirlater-implantedpeers[2].However,theabovementionedarticlesaddressout-comesinchildrenimplantedundertheageof3years.Thereispaucityontheliteraturereview-ingthoseimplantedundertwoyears.Childrenim-plantedbetween9and18monthsdemonstratedalanguage-learningratesimilartothatoftheirhear-ingpeers[9].However,thiswasbasedonscoresfromtheparentalreportmeasures(SKI*HI)andnotonactualauditoryperceptiontests.Threeofthesechildren,withmoreCIexperience,wereassessedonthePBKwordlistandachievedwordscoreson