Objective: This systematic review aims to establish the expected hearing and speech outcomes following cochlear implantation (CI) in patients with profound congenital deafness secondary to Waardenburg syndrome (WS).
Methods: A systematic review of the literature and narrative synthesis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Databases searched: Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Collection, and ClinicalTrials.gov. No limits were placed on language or year of publication.
Results: Searches identified 186 abstracts and full texts. Of these, 16 studies met inclusion criteria reporting outcomes in 179 patients and at least 194 implants. Hearing outcomes of those receiving cochlear implantation were generally good. Five studies included genetic analysis of one or more of the participants. A total of 11 peri/post-operative complications were reported. The methodological quality of included studies was modest, mainly comprising noncontrolled case series with small cohort size. All studies were OCEBM grade III-IV.
Conclusion: Cochlear implantation in congenitally deafened children with Waardenburg Syndrome is a well-established intervention as a method of auditory rehabilitation. Due to the uncommon nature of the condition, there is a lack of large-scale high-quality studies examining the use of cochlear implantation in this patient group. However, overall outcomes following implantation are positive with the majority of patients demonstrating improved audiometry, speech perception and speech intelligibility supporting its use in appropriately selected cases.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10446317 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lio2.1110 | DOI Listing |
Otol Neurotol
January 2025
Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Background: The aim of this study was to relate response patterns of electrocochleography (ECochG) recordings during cochlear implantation to pre- and postoperative hearing.
Methods: Thirty subjects with either flat (FA, n = 9) or sloping (SA, n = 21) audiograms before cochlear implantation were prospectively included. Real-time ECochG recordings were conducted via the cochlear implant.
Otol Neurotol
February 2025
Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Donders Center for Neuroscience, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Objective: To compare the 3-year outcomes of the modified minimally invasive Ponto surgery (m-MIPS) to both the original MIPS (o-MIPS) and linear incision technique with soft tissue preservation (LIT-TP) for inserting bone-anchored hearing implants (BAHIs).
Study Design: Prospective study with three patient groups: m-MIPS, o-MIPS, and LIT-TP.
Setting: Tertiary referral center.
Otol Neurotol
February 2025
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Objective: To analyze the use of electrical field imaging (EFI) in the detection of extracochlear electrodes in cochlear implants (CI).
Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.
Setting: Tertiary academic medical center.
Objective: The aim of this study is to test the feasibility of a custom 3D-printed guide for performing a minimally invasive cochleostomy for cochlear implantation.
Study Design: Prospective performance study.
Setting: Secondary care.
Otol Neurotol
February 2025
Department of Surgery, Section of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the potential association of perioperative hearing outcomes with frailty by Modified 5-Item Frailty Index (mFI-5).
Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study.
Setting: Single-institutional study conducted at a tertiary care hospital between January 2018 and January 2022.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!