Perioperative, transtympanic electric abr in paediatric cochlear implant candidates

A Retrospective Evaluation to Assess Reliability of Electrophysiological Methods for Diagnosis of Hearing Loss in Infants

Background: An electrophysiological investigation with auditory brainstem response (ABR), round window electrocochleography (RW-ECoG), and electrical-ABR (E-ABR) was performed in children with suspected hearing loss with the purpose of early diagnosis and treatment. The effectiveness of the electrophysiological measures as diagnostic tools was assessed in this study. Methods: In this retrospective case series with chart review, 790 children below 3 years of age with suspected profound hearing loss were tested with impedance audiometry and underwent electrophysiological investigation (ABR, RW-ECoG, and E-ABR). All implanted cases underwent pure-tone audiometry (PTA) of the non-implanted ear at least 5 years after surgery for a long-term assessment of the reliability of the protocol. Results: Two hundred and fourteen children showed bilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss. In 56 children with either ABR thresholds between 70 and 90 dB nHL or no response, RW-ECoG showed thresholds below 70 dB nHL. In the 21 infants with bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss receiving a unilateral cochlear implant, no statistically significant differences were found in auditory thresholds in the non-implanted ear between electrophysiological measures and PTA at the last follow-up (p > 0.05). Eight implanted children showed residual hearing below 2000 Hz worse than 100 dB nHL and 2 children showed pantonal residual hearing worse than 100 dB nHL (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The audiological evaluation of infants with a comprehensive protocol is highly reliable. RW-ECoG provided a better definition of hearing thresholds, while E-ABR added useful information in cases of auditory nerve deficiency.

Extracochlear Stimulation of Electrically Evoked Auditory Brainstem Responses (eABRs) Remains the Preferred Pre-implant Auditory Nerve Function Test in an Assessor-blinded Comparison

OBJECTIVE

Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses (eABRs) can be recorded before cochlear implant (CI) surgery to verify auditory nerve function, and is particularly helpful in to assess the function of the auditory nerve in cases of auditory nerve hypoplasia. This is the first study to compare three preimplant eABRs recording techniques: 1) standard extracochlear, 2) novel intracochlear, and 3) conventional intracochlear with the CI.

STUDY DESIGN

A within-participants design was used where eABRs were sequentially measured during CI surgery using three methods with stimulation from: 1) an extracochlear electrode placed at the round window niche, 2) two different electrodes on a recently developed Intracochlear Test Array (ITA), and 3) two different electrodes on a CI electrode array.

SETTING

New adults implantees (n = 16) were recruited through the Manchester Auditory Implant Centre and eABR measurements were made in theater at the time of CI surgery.

PATIENTS

All participants met the clinical criteria for cochlear implantation. Only participants with radiologically normal auditory nerves were recruited to the study. All participants were surgically listed for either a MED-EL Synchrony implant or a Cochlear Nucleus Profile implant, per standard practice in the implant centre.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measures were: 1) charge (μC) required to elicit a threshold response, and 2) latencies (ms) in the threshold waveforms. Secondary outcome measures were: 1) morphologies of responses at suprathreshold stimulation levels and 2) wave V growth patterns.

RESULTS

eABRs were successfully measured from 15 participants. In terms of primary outcome measures, the charge required to elicit a response using the extracochlear electrode (median = 0.075 μC) was approximately six times larger than all other electrodes and the latency of wave V was approximately 0.5 ms longer when using the extracochlear electrode (mean = 5.1 ms). In terms of secondary outcomes, there were some minor quantitative differences in responses between extracochlear and intracochlear stimulation; in particular, ITA responses were highly variable in quality. The ITA responses were rated poor quality in 33% of recordings and in two instances did not allow for data collection. When not disrupted by open circuits, the median ITA response contained one more waveform than the median extracochlear response.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first study comparing intracochlear and extracochlear stimulation, the results show that both can be used to produce an eABR that is representative of the one elicited by the CI. In the majority of cases, extracochlear stimulation was the preferred approach for preimplant auditory nerve function testing because of consistency, recordings that could be analyzed, and because extracochlear placement of the electrode does not require a cochleostomy to insert an electrode.

Pediatric cochlear implantation: candidacy evaluation, medical and surgical considerations, and expanding criteria

Since the first cochlear implant approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in the early 1980s, great advances have occurred in cochlear implant technology. With these advances, patient selection, preoperative evaluation, and rehabilitation consideration continue to evolve. This article describes the current practice in pediatric candidacy evaluation, reviews the medical and surgical considerations in pediatric cochlear implantation, and explores the expanding criteria for cochlear implantation within the pediatric population.