Auditory brainstem implant in postmeningitis totally ossified cochleae

Auditory Brainstem Implant Outcomes in Tumor and Nontumor Patients: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate the differences in auditory performance between auditory brainstem implant (ABI) patients with tumor or nontumor etiologies.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection from 1990 to 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

We included published studies with 5 or more pediatric or adult ABI users. Auditory outcomes and side effects were analyzed with weighted means for closed-set, open-set speech, and categories of auditory performance (CAP) scores. Overall performance was compared using an Adult Pediatric Ranked Order Speech Perception (APROSPER) scale created for this study.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included and underwent full-text review. Data were extracted for 662 tumor and 267 nontumor patients. 83% were postlingually deafened and 17% were prelingually deafened. Studies that included tumor ABI patients had a weighted mean speech recognition of 39.2% (range: 19.6%-83.3%) for closed-set words, 23.4% (range: 17.2%-37.5%) for open-set words, 21.5% (range: 2.7%-48.4%) for open-set sentences, and 3.1 (range: 1.0-3.2) for CAP scores. Studies including nontumor ABI patients had a weighted mean speech recognition of 79.8% (range: 31.7%-84.4%) for closed-set words, 53.0% (range: 14.6%-72.5%) for open-set sentences, and 2.30 (range: 2.0-4.7) for CAP scores. Mean APROSPER results indicate better auditory performance among nontumor versus tumor patients (3.5 vs 3.0, P = .04). Differences in most common side effects were also observed between tumor and nontumor ABI patients.

CONCLUSION

Auditory performance is similar for tumor and nontumor patients for standardized auditory test scores. However, the APROSPER scale demonstrates better ABI performance for nontumor compared to tumor patients.

Auditory Brainstem Implants-Hearing Restoration in Congenitally Deaf Children

BACKGROUND

Children who are born deaf can learn to hear and to speak with the aid of a cochlear implant (CI). If the implantation of a CI is not possible for anatomical reasons, an auditory brainstem implant (ABI) is the only surgical option for auditory rehabilitation. It is estimated that about 5 to 45 children could potentially benefit from this treatment in Germany each year. In this article, we present and discuss the current state of the scientific evidence.

METHODS

The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications from 2010 onward. 15 articles reporting at least 10 cases with at least one year of auditory follow-up were included in the analysis. The results, including CAP ("categories of auditory performance") scores on a scale of 0 to 7, are presented and compared with the authors' own findings in a series of 38 patients.

RESULTS

All of the publications show that children who do not suffer from impairments of other kinds hear significantly better with an ABI than those with additional handicaps. Early implantation is advantageous, under the age of three years if possible. The results vary widely across publications and from patient to patient. The mean CAP score in all publications is 3.57 (standard deviation [SD], 1.04). 38.24% of the patients (SD 18.68) achieved the ability to understand spoken language (CAP ≥= 5), more specifically, the ability to communicate in everyday life without lip reading, in person and some even succeed in conversing over the telephone.

CONCLUSION

ABI is a safe and effective treatment for sensorineural deafness in congenitally deaf children who cannot be treated with a cochlear implant. In particular, children without any other impairments have a good chance of developing the ability to understand spoken language, especially if the implantation is performed early.

Neurosensory Prosthetics: An Integral Neuromodulation Part of Bioelectronic Device

Bioelectronic medicines (BEMs) constitute a branch of bioelectronic devices (BEDs), which are a class of therapeutics that combine neuroscience with molecular biology, immunology, and engineering technologies. Thus, BEMs are the culmination of thought processes of scientists of varied fields and herald a new era in the treatment of chronic diseases. BEMs work on the principle of neuromodulation of nerve stimulation. Examples of BEMs based on neuromodulation are those that modify neural circuits through deep brain stimulation, vagal nerve stimulation, spinal nerve stimulation, and retinal and auditory implants. BEDs may also serve as diagnostic tools by mimicking human sensory systems. Two examples of in vitro BEDs used as diagnostic agents in biomedical applications based on in vivo neurosensory circuits are the bioelectronic nose and bioelectronic tongue. The review discusses the ever-growing application of BEDs to a wide variety of health conditions and practices to improve the quality of life.

Double challenge: cochlear implantation in the only hearing ear with progressive hearing loss following meningitis and vestibular dysfunction after implantation

Objective

Vestibular dysfunction associated with cochlear implantation is rare. It is usually seen in patients with otosclerosis due to spread of electrical activity throughout the demineralized bone. A 17-year old female with progressive hearing loss 2 years after meningitis and vestibular dysfunction in the implanted ear is presented in this study.

Findings

The patient had mild hearing loss in the right ear and total hearing loss on the left side because of complete ossification of the cochlea following meningitis. She had to have cochlear implantation in the right ear because of progression of hearing loss. She had successful implantation but she experienced vestibular dysfunction following activation of cochlear electrodes. Closure of two electrodes caused disruption of auditory programming. Then the patient was subjected to long term vestibular rehabilitation program.

Conclusion

Timing for implantation before the completion of cochlear ossification is crucial not to miss the chance for hearing restoration. However, difficulties in hearing rehabilitation due to extensive ossification can be doubled by vestibular problems triggered by stimulation of the vestibular nerve by cochlear electrodes. Attempts to reduce the balance problem will complicate auditory programming. Vestibular rehabilitation for long term helps to carry on hearing progress.