Long-term functional outcome and satisfaction of patients with an active middle ear implant for sensorineural hearing loss compared to a matched population with conventional hearing aids

The objectives of the study were to review the results of an active middle ear implant for sensorineural hearing loss in patients who were unable to wear or did not benefit from conventional hearing aids in comparison to patients with a matched degree of hearing loss successfully fitted with a conventional hearing aid. A retrospective chart review of 10 patients (10 ears) after implantation of an active middle ear implant and 12 patients (13 ears) with conventional hearing aids in one tertiary referral center was performed. Intervention for sensorineural hearing loss was the implantation of an active middle ear implant in one group or fitting of conventional hearing aids in the other group. Outcome measures were pure-tone audiometry (auditory thresholds, functional gain), speech audiometry (Freiburg Monosyllabic Test in quiet and in noise) and a quality-of-life questionnaire (Glasgow Benefit Inventory). Average functional gain was 25.2 ± 8.6 and 14.6 ± 10.8 dB, speech recognition score in noise was 36.6 ± 18.4 and 31.2 ± 19.2 % and in quiet was 66.0 ± 23.2 and 61.5 ± 23.8 %, Glasgow Benefit Inventory total score was 38.3 ± 32.3 and 24.8 ± 22.2 in patients with active middle ear implants and conventional hearing aids, respectively. In two patient groups matched for degree of sensorineural hearing loss, active middle ear implants provided comparable speech recognition and superior functional gain and quality of life compared to conventional hearing aids. Level of evidence: 4     

Post-lingual deafness: benefits of cochlear implants vs. conventional hearing aids

The technological advances in cochlear implants and processing strategies have enabled subjects affected by severe to profound hearing loss to hear sounds and recognize speech in various different degrees. The variability of hearing outcomes in subjects with post-lingual deafness has been significant and cochlear implant indications have been extended to include an ever larger population.ObjectiveThis paper aims to look into the groups of post-lingual deafness patients to find where cochlear implants have yielded better outcomes than conventional hearing aids.Materials and MethodsReview the literature available on databases SciELO, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and LILACS-BIREME. The publications selected for review were rated as A or B on evidence strength on the day of the review. Their authors analyzed and compared hearing aids and cochlear implants in populations of post-lingually deaf patients. Study Design: Systematic review.ResultsEleven out of the 2,169 papers searched were found to be pertinent to the topic and were rated B for evidence strength. Six studies were prospective cohort trials, four were cross-sectional studies and one was a clinical trial.ConclusionThe assessment done on the benefits yielded by post-lingually deaf subjects from cochlear implants showed that they are effective and provide for better results than conventional hearing aids.     

Speech understanding in quiet and noise in bilateral users of the MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implant system

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to investigate speech understanding in quiet and noise in subjects bilaterally implanted with multi-channel cochlear implants. DESIGN: Nine adults bilaterally implanted with MED-EL implants were included in the study. The subjects were tested in three conditions: with both implants, with the right implant only, and with the left implant only. Speech tests included monosyllables in quiet and sentences in noise (10 dB signal to noise ratio). Speech was presented from the front, and noise was presented from either 90 degrees or 270 degrees azimuth. RESULTS: All subjects reported benefit from bilateral stimulation. Speech scores for all subjects were higher with bilateral than with unilateral stimulation. The average score across subjects for sentence understanding was 31.1 percentage points higher with both cochlear implants compared with the cochlear implant ipsilateral to the noise, and 10.7 percentage points higher with both cochlear implants compared with the cochlear implant contralateral to the noise. The average score for recognition of monosyllabic words was 18.7 percentage points higher with both cochlear implants than with one cochlear implant. All of these differences in average scores were significant at the 5% level. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral cochlear implantation provides a significant benefit in speech understanding in both quiet and noise.     

Waardenburg综合征患者人工耳蜗植入后效果分析

目的 评价伴有Waardenburg综合征患者人工耳蜗植入术后的效果.方法 用青少年儿童及婴幼儿听说能力评估问卷家长观察记录表(parients'evaluation of aural/oral performance of children,PEACH)对16例在北京协和医院行人工耳蜗植入术的Waardenburg综合征患者进行术后效果调查,并与非综合征且无明显病因的人工耳蜗植入患者比较.结果 经统计学分析,Waardenburg综合征患者组PEACH安静下得分,噪声下得分、总得分以及电话交流能力与对照组相应得分比较,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05),两组患者安静下得分明显高于噪声下得分(P＜0.05).结论 伴有重度或极重度感音神经性聋的Waardenburg综合征患者人工耳蜗植入术后的听觉感知及言语效果与正常耳蜗的重度或极重度感音神经性聋患者相同,安静下听觉感知及言语效果好于噪声下听觉感知及言语效果.     

Cochlear implantation in the neurofibromatosis type 2 patient: long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term hearing outcomes of neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) patients with cochlear implants. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of cochlear implant performance in NF2 patients using open- and closed-set speech perception testing. RESULTS: Patients with NF2-associated bilateral vestibular schwannomas frequently become profoundly deaf. The aim of surgical resection should be to preserve serviceable hearing in at least one ear; however, this goal can be difficult to achieve. Frequently, tumor size or poor preoperative hearing status can require a surgical approach that leaves the patient with a profound, bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. If the cochlear nerve is preserved anatomically after vestibular schwannoma surgery, and if promontory stimulation confirms the functionality of the cochlear nerve, then cochlear implantation is an excellent option to restore hearing. We present six cochlear implant patients with NF2 who attained a significant improvement in open- and closed-set speech understanding with a mean follow-up of 7.9 (range: 5-13) years after surgery. In all but one case, the hearing results did not deteriorate over the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Early surgical intervention for vestibular schwannomas in NF2 patients when the cochlear nerve can be spared is an important consideration to allow for possible cochlear implantation. A 6- to 8-week recovery period for the anatomically intact cochlear nerve may be necessary to obtain a positive promontory stimulation response following tumor resection and should be performed prior to cochlear implantation.     

A prospective study of the cost-utility of the multichannel cochlear implant.

CONTEXT: Prior clinical studies have indicated that cochlear implantation provides benefits to individuals with advanced sensorineural hearing loss who are unable to gain effective speech recognition with hearing aids. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for adults receiving multichannel cochlear implants. DESIGN: Prospective 12-month multicenter study using preference-based quality-of-life measures and total cost determinations, comparing profoundly hearing-impaired adult subjects with and without cochlear implants. SETTING: Hospital-based and patient-resource clinics. PATIENTS: Severely to profoundly hearing-impaired adult recipients of a cochlear implant and adults eligible for the device who had not yet received it. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Clinical assessment of implant participants included medical and audiologic (speech understanding) data at the time of enrollment, 6 months, and 12 months. All participants' health-utility was assessed at the time of enrollment, 6 months, and 12 months using the Health Utility Index. One-year medical resource utilization and cost data included bills related to implants, patient diaries, charge estimates from clinical sites, and published literature. A decision model was developed to determine cost per QALY. RESULTS: Of the 84 enrolled adults, 62 (75%) completed the study. Mean health-utility scores at the time of enrollment were identical between groups. The marginal 12-month health-utility gain for implant recipients was 0.20; 90% of this improvement was achieved within 6 months. For patients with a mean 22-year life expectancy, the marginal cost per QALY was $14,670. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, multichannel cochlear implants significantly improved recipients' performance on measures of speech understanding and ratings of health-utility within 6 months of implantation. The multichannel cochlear implant yielded a very favorable cost per QALY.     

Audiological application criteria for implantable hearing aid devices: a clinical experience at the Nijmegen ORL clinic

Objectives/Hypothesis: To define audiological application criteria for different implantable hearing aid devices. Study Design: Retrospective study. Methods: Comparisons were made between aided speech recognition scores obtained at conversational level (65 dB) in patients with the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) (n = 22), the Otologics middle ear transducer (MET) (n = 10), conventional hearing aids (behind-the-ears) (n = 47), and cochlear implants (CIs) (n = 123). Results: In relation to hearing loss, only for mild hearing loss, speech recognition scores with VSB were comparable to that with conventional hearing aids. In the Otologics MET users, speech recognition scores were comparable with those of the conventional hearing aid users until a mean hearing loss of about 75 dB HL. At a sensorineural hearing loss of about 65 dB HL or more, the Otologics MET users have better speech recognition scores than the VSB users. For comparison with CI users, we followed a more conservative approach. In 90% of the users of a CI, speech recognition scores were better than those in: 1) patients with a conventional hearing aid and a mean hearing loss of about 95 dB HL or worse; 2) patients with an Otologics MET and a mean hearing loss of 85 dB HL or worse. Conclusions: Patients fitted with a VSB or an Otologics MET middle ear implant do not demonstrate better speech recognition scores than patients fitted with today's conventional hearing aids. Results might even been worse. However, the VSB and Otologics MET are a good option in patients with moderate (VSB) to severe (Otologics MET) sensorineural hearing loss and external otitis.     

老年及老年前期人工耳蜗植入的临床初步研究

目的 探索人工耳蜗在双耳重度或极重度聋和全聋的老年患者中的临床应用安全性和效果.方法 2008年11月至2009年11月解放军总医院先后对8例50岁以上患者行人工耳蜗植入术,其中男5例,女3例;年龄52～76岁,中位数58岁.所有患者术前均为双侧极重度感音神经性听力损失,佩戴助听器无效或效果不佳.观察患者手术耐受及并发症情况.开机后3个月进行助听听阈评估和言语评估.结果 8例患者手术顺利,术中神经反应遥测均引出反应.术后康复顺利,无任何并发症.开机3个月后声场内言语频率平均助听听阈啭音(听力级)为35～50 dB,但言语测听结果个体差异较大.部分患者单音节、双音节、安静及噪声环境下的句子可实现较好识别率.结论 老年前期及老年患者可耐受全身麻醉状态下的人工耳蜗植入,只要术前准备充分则为安全的手术,但部分病例为中耳炎(胆脂瘤)或颞骨外伤等因素导致,需要特别注意中耳情况.老年重度以上听力损失患者人工耳蜗植入可明显改善言语识别能力.     

Does cochlear reimplantation affect speech recognition?

Although cochlear implantation has been proven to be a very effective method of rehabilitation for post-lingually deaf adults and pre-lingually deaf children, as electronic devices, cochlear implants are occasionally subject to damage or breakdowns. In these cases, reimplantation would be necessary. The aim of this study was to find out whether or not there are any negative effects on speech abilities after reimplantation with the same type of multichannel digital implant in the same ear. Seven patients were provided with a digital multi-channel cochlear implant. One subject suffered manipulative damage to the implant, and in six subjects an implant failure was observed. All reimplantations were performed on the same ear as the initial implantation. with the same implant type. Parameters such as insertion depth and number of active channels were the same in all subjects before and after reimplantation. Immediately following the revision surgery, three patients attained the same level of hearing that they had with their original implants. Three months following reimplantation, five subjects achieved almost the same scores that they had before reimplantation. The results showed that cochlear implant patients undergoing re-implantation can anticipate achieving nearly the same level of speech recognition as they had with their original implant. Nevertheless, patients need to be aware of potential problems before undergoing reimplantation so that expectations are not too high.     

Comprehensive hearing aid assessment in adults with bilateral severe-profound sensorineural hearing loss who present for Cochlear implant evaluation

PurposeTo comprehensively assess and describe functional auditory performance in a group of adults with bilateral, moderate sloping to profound sensorineural hearing loss who were dissatisfied users of well-fit bilateral hearing aids and presented for Cochlear implant evaluation. Participants were evaluated with bilateral hearing aids and after six months of bimodal (Cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid) hearing experience with a Cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid.MethodsStudy participants were assessed using pure tone audiometry, aided speech understanding in quiet (CNC words) and in noise (AzBio sentences at +10 and +5 dB SNR) in the sound field with unilateral and bilateral hearing aids fit to target. Participants completed subjective scales of quality of life, (Health Utilities Index Mark 3), hearing disability, (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale) and a device use satisfaction scale. Participants ≥55 years were administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment screening tool. One-hundred enrolled individuals completed baseline evaluations.ResultsAided bilateral mean speech understanding scores were 28% for CNC words and 31%, and 17% for AzBio sentences at a +10 dB, and +5 dB SNR, respectively. Mean scale ratings were 0.46 for overall quality of life and 3.19 for functional hearing ability. Ninety percent of participants reported dissatisfaction with overall hearing performance.ConclusionsEvaluation results, including functional performance metrics quantifying the deleterious effects of hearing loss for overall wellbeing, underscore that bilateral hearing aids are not an effective treatment for individuals with bilateral, moderate sloping to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Individuals with this degree of hearing impairment, who demonstrate poor aided speech understanding and dissatisfaction with hearing abilities in everyday life, require timely referral to a Cochlear implant clinic for further evaluation.     

Audiological performance after cochlear implantation in children with inner ear malformations

OBJECTIVES: To prove that cochlear implantation is a beneficial method of rehabilitation in deaf children with malformations of the inner ear. DESIGN: The evaluation of auditory responses to speech (EARS) test battery was performed on the children in this study after an average implant use of 3 years. RESULTS: Individual results of six children with inner ear anomalies receiving cochlear implants are presented in this study. Three of the patients showed an incomplete partition (Mondini dysplasia), one had a cochlear hypoplasia and two suffered from an intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak. The majority of the children in this study are successful implant users. Wherever possible, test scores are included and subjective case reports given. CONCLUSIONS: Results are similar to those in children with normal cochleas, therefore inner ear malformations found in as many as 20% of patients with congenital sensorineural hearing loss are no contraindication for cochlear implantation. Nevertheless, factors influencing the success of implantation are multiple, including a thorough preoperative radiological examination, a well-performed surgery and an individually tailored postoperative rehabilitation programme.     

Superiority of bilateral cochlear implantation over unilateral cochlear implantation in tone discrimination in chinese patients

PURPOSE: The benefits of bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) versus unilateral CIs were evaluated by comparing the Cantonese lexical tone discrimination scores conducted in a quiet environment and against a background noise. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four postlingually deafened Cantonese-speaking adults (2 men and 2 women) with bilateral CIs were included in this study. The subjects were their own control in the monaural hearing condition. Both the Cantonese lexical tone stimuli and the speech-weighted background noise were presented at 0(0) azimuth and at a distance of 1 m from the subject. The speech stimuli, which were maintained at 65 dB sound pressure level, were presented in both a quiet environment and against a background noise at signal to noise ratios (SNRs) of +15, +10, +5, 0, -5, -10, and -15. RESULTS: Against a background noise, the bilateral CIs required +5 dB SNR only to obtain significant scores in discriminating Cantonese lexical tones and to achieve discrimination scores that were comparable to the optimal discrimination scores obtained in quiet. No significant difference in the discrimination scores was observed between binaural and monaural hearing conditions when the tests were conducted in quiet. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that in the presence of background noise, bilateral CIs were better than unilateral CIs in discriminating Cantonese lexical tones.     

Should a hearing aid in the contralateral ear be recommended for children with a unilateral cochlear implant?

OBJECTIVES: To predict bimodal benefit before cochlear implantation, we compared the performances of participants with bimodal fitting and with a cochlear implant alone on speech perception tests. METHODS: Twenty-two children with a cochlear implant in one ear and a hearing aid in the other (bimodal fitting) were included. Several aided and unaided average hearing thresholds and the aided word recognition score of the hearing aid ear were related to the bimodal benefit on a phoneme recognition test in quiet and in noise. Results with bimodal fitting were compared to results with the cochlear implant alone on a phoneme recognition test in quiet and in noise. RESULTS: No relationship was found between any of the hearing thresholds or the aided phoneme recognition score of the hearing aid ear and the bimodal benefit on the phoneme recognition tests. At the group level, the bimodal scores on the phoneme recognition tests in quiet and in noise were significantly better than the scores with the cochlear implant alone. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperatively available audiometric parameters are not reliable predictors of bimodal benefit in candidates for cochlear implantation. Children with unilateral implants benefit from bimodal fitting on speech tests. This improvement in performance warrants the recommendation of bimodal fitting even when bimodal benefit cannot be predicted.     

影响语前聋患儿人工耳蜗植入术后前语言交流能力的因素分析

目的 探讨影响语前聋患儿人工耳蜗植入术后前语言交流能力的相关因素.方法 对接受人工耳蜗植入术的语前聋患儿 31例进行随访调查,平均植入年龄为46.71±24.78月,术后1个月开机进行康复训练;采用视频分析法于开机后12个月对患儿的轮流交流、主动交流、视觉交流及听觉注意等进行分析,并根据以下方面分组:按植入年龄分为≤36个月组16例,>36个月组15例;按术前有无正规康复训练(时间超过3个月)分为康复组14例,未康复组17例;按术前残余听力分为≤80 dB HL组6例,>80 dB HL组25例;按术前是否使用助听器(时间超过3个月)分为使用组21例,未使用组10例.应用Wilcoxon秩和检验分析各组前语言交流能力的差别.结果 术前进行康复训练、术前佩戴助听器、术前残余听力好的人工耳蜗植入患儿的前语言交流能力得分高于术前未进行康复训练、术前未佩戴助听器、术前残余听力差的人工耳蜗植入患儿(P<0.05);植入年龄≤36个月组与>36个月组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 术前残余听力好、佩戴助听器、进行过正规康复训练的语前聋患儿人工耳蜗植入术后其前语言交流能力较好,而植入年龄对其无明显影响.     

Residual hearing conservation and electroacoustic stimulation with the nucleus 24 contour advance cochlear implant.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the conservation of residual hearing in recipients of the Nucleus 24 Contour Advance cochlear implant (CI) and the benefits of combined electrical and acoustic stimulation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective multicenter study. SETTING: CI clinics in Western Europe. PATIENTS: Adult candidates for conventional cochlear implantation with a minimum preoperative word recognition score of 10% in the ear to be implanted. INTERVENTION: "Soft-surgery" protocol, including a 1- to 1.2-mm anterior and inferior cochleostomy hole with the electrode array, inserted 17 mm using the "advance-off-stylet" technique. Patients with postoperative pure-tone hearing threshold levels (HTLs) of 80 dB hearing loss or less at 125 and 250 Hz and 90 dB hearing loss or less at 500 Hz were refitted with an in-the-ear hearing aid for combined ipsilateral electrical and acoustic (El-Ac) stimulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A questionnaire to collect information regarding surgery. Pure-tone HTLs measured at intervals. Word recognition tested in quiet and sentence recognition tested in noise at 10 and 5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). HEARING CONSERVATION RESULTS: HTL data were available for 27 patients. HTLs were conserved within 20 dB of preoperative levels for 33, 26, and 19% of patients for 125, 250, and 500 Hz, respectively. However, the recommended soft-surgery protocol was strictly followed in only 12 of 27 patients. For these 12 patients, hearing thresholds were conserved within 20 dB for 50, 50, and 33% of patients. Median threshold increases were 40 dB (range, 250-500 Hz) for the whole group and 23 dB for the strict surgery group. Ten patients retained sufficient HTLs to enter the El-Ac user group. SPEECH RECOGNITION RESULTS: Group mean recognition scores for nine El-Ac users for words presented at 65 dB sound pressure level were 45% for CI alone and 55% for CI + ipsilateral hearing aid (p < 0.05, paired t). For sentences presented in noise at 5 dB SNR, mean word scores were 46% CI alone and 56% CI + ipsilateral hearing aid (p < 0.01, paired t). CONCLUSION: Hearing was conserved for conventional candidates for cochlear implantation where the recommended soft-surgery protocol was strictly adhered. Combined ipsilateral electrical and acoustic stimulation provided considerable benefits for speech recognition in noise, equivalent to between 3 and 5 dB SNR, compared with CI alone.     

植入人工耳蜗与配戴助听器儿童背景噪声下的声调识别

目的 探讨植入人工耳蜗与配戴助听器儿童在声调识别方面是否存在差异,分析背景噪声对听障儿童声调识别的影响.了解在噪声环境中听障儿童声调识别的特点.方法 采用2X4两因素混合实验设计,比较植入人工耳蜗与配戴助听器儿童在不同信噪比条件下(SNR=+12,+6,0 dB)的声调识别能力;采用单因素方差分析,比较不同声调组合识别对听障儿童的难易程度.结果 ①在重建或补偿听阈相似时,植入人工耳蜗与配戴助听器儿童声调识别能力的差异不显著;②在不同信噪比条件下,两组儿童声调识别能力的差异极其显著;③两组儿童均最易分辨一声与四声的差异,最难分辨二声与三声的差异.结论 只要重建或补偿听阈在最适范围,听障儿童便具有一定的声调识别能力,但噪声会对其产生极大的影响.     

有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入术

目的介绍一种有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入技术,探讨人工耳蜗植入手术对有残余听力患者的治疗效果和价值。方法15例有残余听力的患者接受了保护残余听力的人工耳蜗植入手术。术中电极植入深度在19mm～24mm左右。术后分别检测单纯使用助听器、单纯使用人工耳蜗、人工耳蜗结合助听器三种不同状态下的听力。结果15例患者中,有13例术后残余听力保存良好,仅分别丢失5～20dB听力,但另2例术后残余听力全部丧失。术后在安静、信噪比15dB和10dB三种不同状态下的言语测试结果显示,人工耳蜗结合助听器使用者测试得分始终保持在很高水平;单纯使用人工耳蜗者也有较好的成绩,但在信噪比达10dB的条件下,测试成绩下降;而单纯使用助听器者,不仅在安静状态下听力成绩不甚理想,一旦加入竞争性噪声,听力测试成绩急剧下降。结论保护和利用残余听力的人工耳蜗植入技术,使人工耳蜗植入手术对象从重度或极重度聋扩大到高频为重度或极重度聋,低频（≤500Hz）为中、轻度聋的患者。接受这项技术患者的听力和言语识别能力均明显优于其单纯配戴助听器和单纯使用人工耳蜗时的听力和言语识别能力。     

Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in a patient with bilateral Ménière's disease

This case study describes a 45-yr-old female with bilateral, profound sensorineural hearing loss due to Ménière's disease. She received her first cochlear implant in the right ear in 2008 and the second cochlear implant in the left ear in 2010. The case study examines the enhancement to speech recognition, particularly in noise, provided by bilateral cochlear implants. Speech recognition tests were administered prior to obtaining the second implant and at a number of test intervals following activation of the second device. Speech recognition in quiet and noise as well as localization abilities were assessed in several conditions to determine bilateral benefit and performance differences between ears. The results of the speech recognition testing indicated a substantial improvement in the patient's ability to understand speech in noise and her ability to localize sound when using bilateral cochlear implants compared to using a unilateral implant or an implant and a hearing aid. In addition, the patient reported considerable improvement in her ability to communicate in daily life when using bilateral implants versus a unilateral implant. This case suggests that cochlear implantation is a viable option for patients who have lost their hearing to Ménière's disease even when a number of medical treatments and surgical interventions have been performed to control vertigo. In the case presented, bilateral cochlear implantation was necessary for this patient to communicate successfully at home and at work.     

Bimodal benefits of cochlear implant and hearing aid (on the non-implanted ear): a pilot study to develop a protocol and a test battery

ABSTRACT This is a pilot study that aims (1) to help design a protocol for fitting and optimizing cochlear implants and hearing aids, (2) to help design a test battery that can help monitor children's progress and (3) to assess the benefit of using a cochlear implant with a contralateral hearing aid. Seven children between the ages of seven and 15 years completed the study. None of them had worn a contralateral hearing aid (HA) since cochlear implantation (five to seven years after implantation). The Listening Inventory for Education (LIFE), Life Situation Questionnaire (LSQ), and Client Orientated Scale of Improvement for Children (COSI-C) questionnaires together with subject's feedback were used as subjective measures, and speech perception tests - the City of New York (sentences list) (CUNY) and Bamford-Kowal-Bench (sentences list) (BKB) depending on child's speech perception skills - in quiet and in noise were used as objective measures. The results showed mixed subjective feedback, even though objectively all children improved their speech perception scores when wearing cochlear implants and hearing aids. The COSI-C proved to be the most successful tool to collect feedback from parents.     

Role of neck ultrasound during follow-up care of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas

Cantonese language rehabilitation in 28 prelingually deaf children who underwent cochlear implantation was evaluated. All patients were implanted with multichannel devices and the operations went smoothly. They all had improved scores on audiological assessments and speech perception tests. The speech evaluation tests included the recognition of sounds, vowels, consonants and tone. Sentence recognition and story comprehension were both improved after training for 2 years. Cochlear implantation is a useful measure for the speech rehabilitation of prelingually profound deaf children when hearing aids are of no benefit. The multichannel implant device is of clinical significance in the rehabilitation of those patients using tonal language.