一例神经纤维瘤患者植入人工耳蜗的效果观察

目的：探讨神经纤维瘤听力下降患者人工耳蜗植入手术可行性及疗效。方法对一例多发性神经纤维瘤伽马刀术后患者带瘤行CS-10A人工耳蜗植入,术前和术后3个月分别进行裸耳/助听听阈评估、单音节和双音节言语识别测试。结果患者术前右侧重度、左侧极重度感音神经性聋,术前言语识别率左耳最大声输出患者无反应,右耳最大单音节词言语识别率为12%,双耳双音节词言语识别率均为0%。听觉行为分级量表为2级。患者右侧成功植入人工耳蜗。术后3个月助听后声场评估右耳（人工耳蜗植入耳）平均听力42.5 dB HL,单音节词最大言语识别率为64%,双音节词最大言语识别率为47%,听觉行为分级量表为7级。结论在影像学证明听神经完整的情况下,神经纤维瘤伽马刀术后重度聋患者可植入人工耳蜗,以提升听力水平。     

老年人重度和极重度聋双耳助听效果评价

目的评价老年人重度和极重度聋双耳助听效果。方法比较单耳和双耳助听后的言语识别率。结果　单耳助听后的言语识别率,单音节词为７７．５３±２．０７％,双音节词为８６．８２±４．３６％。双耳助听后的言语识别率,单音节词为８６．４７±１．８７％,双音节词为９１．６５±２．１８％。双耳助听效果显著优于单耳。结论双耳助听不仅可显著改善言语分辨能力,而且可使声源定向能力亦获显著改善。非常适合双耳重度和极重度聋的老年人。     

语前聋患儿一侧人工耳蜗对侧助听器效果分析

目的:通过对人工耳蜗植入对侧耳不同听力损失的患儿联合使用助听器与人工耳蜗语前聋患儿的听觉、语言及学习能力进行评估和比较,探索对患儿更为有效的助听方法,帮助患儿获得最大限度的言语交流。方法:将30例3～6岁语前聋患儿按照植入人工耳蜗对侧耳听力损失程度及是否佩戴助听器,分为一侧人工耳蜗+对侧重度听力损失助听器组(CI+SHA组)、一侧人工耳蜗+对侧极重度听力损失助听器组(CI+PHA组)、单耳人工耳蜗组(CI组)。评估各组在康复3、6、9、12、15、18个月时听觉、语言及学习能力,并记录结果。结果:随着术后康复时间的延长,聋儿听觉、语言及学习能力逐渐提高(P<0.05),CI+SHA组听觉能力优于CI+PHA组及CI组(均P<0.05),语言能力及学习能力无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论:语前聋患儿单耳人工耳蜗植入后,若对侧耳尚有残余听力,佩戴助听器后听觉能力效果显著,长期佩戴有助于患儿的康复。     

老年语后聋患者人工耳蜗植入的听觉康复效果分析

目的探讨双耳极重度感音性聋的老年患者人工耳蜗植入后的听觉康复效果。方法 14例语后聋老年患者在我院进行人工耳蜗植入,平均年龄为67.7±4.0岁,观察其手术耐受及并发症,于开机后不同时间(3月、6月和12月)进行助听听阈和言语能力评估。结果 14例患者手术顺利,无明显严重并发症,开机后12个月助听听阈达42.1±9.4d BHL,单音节识别率为43%±15%,安静时句子识别率为63%±17%,听觉行为分级评估为5.7±1.4,人工耳蜗获益好/最好为11例(占78.6%)。结论 60岁以上极重度语后聋患者进行人工耳蜗植入是安全有效的,大部分患者术后可以获得好的言语识别率和听觉行为,年龄不应成为老年人工耳蜗植入的限制因素。     

大前庭水管综合征患者人工耳蜗植入术后效果分析

目的探讨轻度耳蜗结构畸形对人工耳蜗植入术后患者听觉及言语识别能力康复的影响。方法 14例(年龄2.5~7.5岁,人工耳蜗植入年龄4.71±1.94岁)大前庭水管综合征(large vestibular aqueduct syndrome,LVAS)伴重度或极重度感音神经性聋患者为大前庭水管综合征组,另选择临床资料相匹配的耳蜗结构正常的重度或极重度感音神经性聋患者14例(年龄2.5~7.5岁,人工耳蜗植入年龄4.68±1.80岁)为对照组。两组均行单耳人工耳蜗植入术,术后12个月分别进行声场助听听阈(0.5~4.0 kHz)、婴幼儿有意义听觉整合量表/有意义听觉整合量表(meaningful auditory integration scale, MAIS)、听觉行为分级(categorical auditory performance criteria,CAP)以及言语可懂度分级(speech intelligibility rating scale,SIR)评估,并进行言语识别能力(包括自然环境声响识别、声母识别、韵母识别、声调识别、单音节词识别、双音节词识别、三音节词识别、短句识别)评估。结果大前庭水管综合征组及对照组术后12个月声场助听平均听阈(分别为36.88±5.73、35.36±6.29 dB HL)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组的MAIS得分率(分别为87.85%±8.01%、87.85%±9.75%)、CAP评分(分别平均为7级和6.5级)、SIR评分(分别平均为5级和4.5级)的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组八项言语识别能力评估的言语识别率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论大前庭水管综合征语前聋儿童植入人工耳蜗后听觉言语能力的发展水平与非综合征型先天性聋患儿相当。     

听性稳态反应对人工耳蜗植入者术前残余听力评估的意义

目的探讨听性稳态反应(ASSR)对极重度聋人工耳蜗植入者听觉功能客观评价的意义。方法回顾性分析41例(82耳)接受人工耳蜗植入的极重度感音神经性聋患儿的耳声发射(OAE)、听性稳态反应(auditorysteady-state response,ASSR)与听性脑干反应(ABR)测试结果。结果所有患儿双耳97dB nHL强度下ABR均未引出反应,DPOAE、TEOAE双耳未引出。ASSR引出率为69.51(57/82),0.25、0.5、1、2、4、8kHz的引出率分别为7.31%、9.76%、10.98%、37.80%、34.15%、8.54%,能引出ASSR患者的反应阈在≤100、100～120dB nHL的分别占68.54%、31.46%。结论 ABR及OAE无反应的极重度感音神经性聋患儿,ASSR大部分能引出反应,可为人工耳蜗植入提供依据。     

不同听觉补偿方式下听障儿童的听觉言语康复效果比较

目的比较选配助听器与人工耳蜗植入术后听障儿童的听觉言语康复效果,探讨不同听觉补偿方式对其听觉言语康复效果的影响。方法选取32例6~43月龄选配助听器或人工耳蜗植入后的重度及极重度感音神经性语前聋患儿为研究对象,其中助听器组18名,人工耳蜗组14名,两组的听力损失程度无统计学差异,均在干预1年内进行相同的听觉言语康复训练,使用声场测听测试助听听阈;使用婴幼儿有意义听觉整合量表评估干预前及干预后3、6、9、12个月时的听觉能力;采用《听障儿童听觉言语能力评估》测试两组康复训练前后的言语能力。结果两组患儿助听听阈均优于助听前,但人工耳蜗组各频率助听听阈显著优于助听器组(P<0.05);两组听觉能力得分均随听觉补偿时间的延长而提高(P<0.05);助听器组在干预后9个月的听觉能力得分明显高于干预前、干预3个月及干预6个月(P<0.05);人工耳蜗组在术后6个月的听觉能力得分高于术前及术后3个月(P<0.05);人工耳蜗组在干预后6、9、12个月的听觉能力得分均高于助听器组(P<0.05);两组助听后康复级别及言语年龄均高于助听前,人工耳蜗组康复级别及言语年龄均高于助听器组(P<0.05)。结论对于极重度以上感音神经性聋婴幼儿,人工耳蜗植入者听觉言语康复效果优于助听器选配者。     

使用人工耳蜗和助听器的语前聋儿童言语识别能力的研究

目的 通过对使用人工耳蜗和助听器的语前聋儿童的言语识别能力的比较研究,为人工耳蜗植入适应证提供参考.方法实验对象包括18例人工耳蜗植入和40例配戴助听器的先天性语前聋儿童,先在自由声场测试双耳裸耳听阈,根据装置使用时间和平均裸耳听阈值分组,测试并比较使用人工耳蜗和助听器的语前聋儿童封闭项的声母、韵母、单音节词识别率.结果人工耳蜗植入时间≥2年组儿童的韵母、声母和单音节词识别率明显高于＜2年组患者.助听器使用时间≥2年组的各测试项识别率与＜2年组差异无统计学意义.装置使用时间＜2年的语前聋儿童,人工耳蜗植入者的各测试项识别率均明显高于平均裸耳听阈＞100 dB HL的助听器使用者,与平均裸耳听阈≤100 dB HL的助听器使用者的各测试项识别率差异均无统计学意义.装置使用时间≥2年的语前聋儿童,人工耳蜗植入者的各测试项识别率均明显高于平均裸耳听阈＞90 dB HL的助听器使用者,但与平均裸耳听阈＞70 dB HL但≤90 dB HL的助听器使用者差异无统计学意义.结论极重度语前聋儿童人工耳蜗植入后能获得比助听器使用者更好的言语识别能力.     

语前聋患儿一侧人工耳蜗植入对侧佩戴助听器聆听效果分析

目的：分析语前聋患儿一侧人工耳蜗植入（cochlear implant ,CI）对侧佩戴助听器模式下的聆听效果,以及非植入耳残余听力对聆听效果的影响。方法选取一侧人工耳蜗植入对侧佩戴助听器的语前聋患儿18例,分别测试其在单侧人工耳蜗植入、一侧人工耳蜗植入对侧佩戴助听器的双耳聆听模式（ bimodal fitting ,BIM ）安静环境及稳态噪声环境下标准中文短句、双音节词、单音节词的识别率。结果安静状态下本组患儿CI、BIM 模式单音节词言语识别率分别为82．67％±12．23％、83．61％±12．22％,双音节词分别为76．00％±16．13％、78．11％±14．84％,标准中文短句分别为60．11％±17．18％、65．43％±16．76％;信噪比10 dB环境下CI、BIM 助听模式患儿单音节词识别率分别为75．50％±14．12％、76．83％±14．15％,双音节词分别为68．22％±17．15％、77．18％±16．83％,标准中文短句分别为49．39％±19．26％、56．33％±19．55％,除两种模式下单音节词外其余言语识别率差异均有统计学意义（P＜0．05）,且非植入耳250、500 Hz助听听阈与BIM 模式言语识别率呈负相关。结论语前聋患儿双耳双模式聆听时有一定优势,这种优势可能主要来自低频残余听力。     

9月龄婴儿人工耳蜗植入1例

目前,人工耳蜗植入是能使重度、极重度感音性聋患者获得听力重建的唯一有效方法。越来越多的研究表明,早期人工耳蜗植入能使先天性极重度感音性聋患者获得更好的听力言语康复效果。1岁以内患儿人工耳蜗植入在国内尚未见报道,我科最近诊治1例9月龄先天性重度感音性聋患儿,并行人工耳蜗植入,现报道如下。     

多通道人工耳蜗在语前聋儿童及青少年中的应用

目的 通过对植入人工耳蜗的语前聋儿童和青少年的听力和语言能力的评估,探讨我国儿童在使用人工耳蜗后的听力和言语能力发展规律及影响因素。方法 ２５例行人工耳蜗植入的语前聋儿童及青少年患者参与本组测试。选用《聋儿听觉言语康复评估方法》作为测试材料,分别进行声音,言语声和环境声的辨别,数词,单字词,双字词,３字词,韵母,声母,声调,封闭项列短句的识别,开放项列字词和开放项列短句识别,语言清晰度,模仿句长,     

Cochlear implantation on prelingually deafened adults

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of cochlear implantation (CI) on prelingually deafened adults who have been trained by auditory-verbal/oral communication since childhood. METHODS: Preoperative and postoperative data was investigated regarding the rehabilitation, hearing level, and educational experience of eight prelingually deafened adults. All eight patients were diagnosed with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss (preoperative hearing levels were over 100 dB). All used hearing aids (HA) before the age of two and were trained by auditory-verbal/oral communication since childhood. The average age of the patients at the time of their CI operations was 23.3 ranging from 18 to 29 years of age. The average postoperative observation time was 55.4 months ranging from 11 to 90 months. RESULTS: Improvement was achieved not only on the pure-tone hearing threshold, but also in speech perception on tests using the Japanese video speech discrimination score (SDS) system. All of them now use CI very well in their daily lives and play important roles in society. CONCLUSION: It was demonstrated that even prelingually deafened adult patients could achieve considerable improvement through CI when they were trained well by auditory-verbal/oral communications since childhood. The indications of CI for prelingually deafened adults must be determined carefully, but all of them do not have to be rejected only because they are prelingually deafened. In other words, CI could be recommended for prelingually deafened adult patients if they received habilitation well with consistent auditory-verbal/oral training using well-fitted HAs.     

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.     

Natural history of contralateral residual hearing in unilateral cochlear implant users - long-term findings

Abstract Conclusion: The long-term stability of low-frequency residual hearing found in a significant number of bilateral-bimodal users (cochlear implant (CI) in one ear and a hearing aid (HA) on the other ear; CI/HA) with severe-to-profound or profound hearing loss in the non-implanted ear justifies bilateral-bimodal fitting efforts in this group. Since low-frequency residual hearing tends to deteriorate in some of these CI/HA users, periodic evaluation, which includes pure-tone thresholds and speech perception tests, is mandatory for determining the point in time at which CI/HA hearing is no longer effective, and the patient should accordingly be considered as a candidate for contralateral cochlear implantation. Objective: To determine, in bilateral-bimodal (CI/HA) users with severe-to-profound or profound hearing loss in the non-implanted ear, the rate of residual hearing deterioration in the non-implanted ear after cochlear implantation. Methods: Pure-tone aided and unaided thresholds in the non-implanted ears of 39 CI/HA users at 0.25-4.0 kHz were recorded prospectively up to 6 years after implantation. Results: Group mean threshold values in the non-implanted ears remained stable over 3, 4, 5 and 6 years post-implantation, except for significant deterioration at 4.0 kHz of both unaided (4.2, 5.2, 9.0 and 8.2 dB, respectively) and aided thresholds (8.1, 4.6, 6.1 and 8.3 dB, respectively).     

Cochlear implantation in prelingually deafened children with residual hearing

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the speech perception skills of prelingually deafened French children with preoperative residual hearing who received multichannel cochlear implants. DESIGN: The design of the study incorporated a within-subject, repeated measures design for assessing speech perception skills. SETTING: Montpellier, Toulouse and Lyon Pediatric Cochlear Implant Centers. SUBJECTS: Seven prelingually deafened children demonstrating marginal benefit from conventional amplification prior to implantation with a Nucleus multichannel cochlear implant, served as subjects for the speech perception assessment (a speech recognition score less than 30% defines marginal benefit from acoustic amplification on open set materials). The mean age at implantation was 7 years, 9 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: Speech perception skills were assessed using open set materials and the MUSS and MAIS questionnaires. RESULTS: Open-set speech recognition averaged 21.4% before implantation, and 83.6% after 1 year's cochlear implant experience. All children demonstrated an open-set score over 60% after 12 months of CI use. MAIS test scores averaged 18.1/40 before implantation and 35.1/40 after 9 months of CI use. MUSS test scores averaged 24.4/40 before implantation and 34.1/40 after 9 months of CI use. CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implantation should be considered for prelingually hearing impaired children demonstrating marginal benefit from hearing aids, with a speech recognition score less than 30% on open set materials, in order to improve their speech discrimination skills.     

Communication abilities of children with aided residual hearing: comparison with cochlear implant users

OBJECTIVE: To compare the communication outcomes between children with aided residual hearing and children with cochlear implants. DESIGN: Measures of speech recognition and language were administered to pediatric hearing aid users and cochlear implant users followed up longitudinally as part of an ongoing investigation on cochlear implant outcomes. The speech recognition measures included the Lexical Neighborhood Test, Phonetically Balanced-Kindergarten Word Lists, and the Hearing in Noise Test for Children presented in quiet and noise (+5 dB signal-to-noise ratio). Language measures included the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: Third Edition (PPVT-III), the Reynell Developmental Language Scales, and the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Revised.Subjects The experimental group was composed of 39 pediatric hearing aid users with a mean unaided pure-tone average threshold of 78.2 dB HL (hearing level). The comparison group was composed of 117 pediatric cochlear implant users with a mean unaided pure-tone average threshold of 110.2 dB HL. On average, both groups lost their hearing at younger than 1 year and were fitted with their respective sensory aids at 2 to 2.6 years of age. Not every child was administered every test for a variety of reasons. RESULTS: Between-group performance was equivalent on most speech recognition and language measures. The primary difference found between groups was on the PPVT-III, in which the hearing aid group had a significantly higher receptive vocabulary language quotient than the cochlear implant group. Notably, the cochlear implant group was substantially younger than the hearing aid group and had less experience with their sensory devices on this measure. CONCLUSION: Data obtained from children with aided residual hearing can be useful in determining cochlear implant candidacy.     

语前聋儿人工耳蜗植入术后心理物理测试的探讨

目的探讨符合语前聋儿心理特点的人工耳蜗植入术后心理物理测试手段.方法采用行为观察法和游戏测听法,对86名接受了人工耳蜗植入手术的语前聋儿进行术后心理物理测试.结果84例(96.51%)测试出听性反应,其间1例第13、14号电极引起非听性反应,2例(2.33%)电极植入失败.41例(47.67%)一月内、39例(45.34%)三月内、4例(4.65%)六个月建立起听性条件反应.各患儿的T、C值均不相同,无正常值范围,在测试的三个月内有T值渐减小、C值渐增大的趋势,声场啭音测试显示患儿听阈都在长时间平均会话声谱(言语香蕉图)上限,对言语的强声和音响器具的强声无不适感觉.结论采用符合语前聋小儿心理特点的人工耳蜗植入术后心理物理测试方法,患儿很快建立听性条件反应,声场评估显示参数设置适宜.     

Monosyllable speech perception of Japanese hearing aid users with prelingual hearing loss: implications for surgical indication of cochlear implant

OBJECTIVE: The monosyllable speech perception ability after years of educational intervention was compared between prelingually deafened pediatric hearing aid users and their cochlear implant counterparts. DESIGN: An open-set monosyllabic speech perception test was conducted on all subjects. The test required subjects to indicate a corresponding Japanese character to that spoken by the examiner. Fifty-two subjects with prelingual hearing impairment (47 hearing aid users and 5 cochlear implant users) were examined. RESULTS: Hearing aid users with average pure-tone thresholds less than 90 dB HL demonstrated generally better monosyllable perception than 70%, which was equivalent or better performance than that of the cochlear implant group. Widely dispersed speech perception was observed within the 90-99 dB HL hearing-aid user group with most subjects demonstrating less than 50% speech perception. In the cluster of >100 dB HL, few cases demonstrated more than 50% in speech perception. The perception ability of the vowel part of each mora within the cochlear implant group was 100% and corresponding to that of hearing aid users with moderate and severe hearing loss. CONCLUSION: Hearing ability among cochlear implant users can be comparable with that of hearing aid users with average unaided pure-tone thresholds of 90 dB HL, after monosyllabic speech perception testing was performed.     

Does the electrodes insertion depth influence speech rehabilitation progress in CI patients?

Many interdisciplinary teams from difference CI centers are studying speech rehabilitation process of implanted patients. Speech rehabilitation progress depend on many conditions like: duration of deafness, age at implantation, cause of deafness. Rehabilitation of postlingually deafened patients is very short. These subjects return very fast to the world of sounds. By the other side speech rehabilitation of prelingually deafened patients needs much more time (years). There are although well seen differences in language skills acquisition inside these groups. It confirmed, that speech rehabilitation after cochlear implantation could depends on others conditions as well. The aim of this study was electrodes insertion depth evaluation (cochleograms) and its influence on speech rehabilitation progress.