|
KMID : 0361020180610050235
|
|
Korean Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
2018 Volume.61 No. 5 p.235 ~ p.241
|
|
|
Limitation of High Pitch Sound Perception in nontumor Patients with Auditory Brainstem Implantation
|
|
Choi Hyun-Seung
Choi Jae-Young
Moon In-Seok
Bae Mi-Ran
Kim Bo-Gyung
Kim Min-Bum
Chang Jin-Woo
Jeong Jun-Hui
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Background and Objectives: Auditory brainstem implantation (ABI) is another option for hearing rehabilitation in non-neurofibromatosis type 2 patients who cannot undergo cochlear implantation (CI). However, the average performance of ABI is worse than that of CI. We analyzed the psycho-electrical parameters of each electrode and psycho-acoustic response to different frequency sounds in nontumor patients with ABI.
Subjects and Method: Sixteen patients with ABI from July 2008 to May 2013 were included in the study. They were followed up for 4 to 56 months. Among them, 12 were prelingual deaf with a narrow internal auditory canal or cochlear ossification. The remaining four were postlingual deaf adults with severely ossified cochleae. We analyzed the electrical parameters [impedance, threshold level (T level), and dynamic range] of each of the 12 electrodes. We also evaluated the sound field pure-tone threshold, Ling 6 sound detection-identification test (Ling 6 test), and pitch ranking data of these patients.
Results: The impedance, T level, and dynamic range did not significantly differ among electrodes. However, the pure-tone threshold to sound field stimulation was elevated in the high tone area, where more variables were found than in the low frequency area. Patients could not identify /S/ and /Sh/ sounds in the Ling 6 test. The mean T level and the dynamic range of the three highest pitch-perceiving electrodes in each patient was higher and narrower, respectively, than those of the three lowest pitch-perceiving electrodes.
Conclusion: The nontumor patients with ABI have difficulty perceiving high pitch sound. More sophisticated penetrating type electrodes and, if possible, bimodal stimulation with CI, could be considered.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Auditory brainstem implantation, Cochlear ossification, Narrow internal auditory canal, nontumor, Outcomes
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
  
|
|