Cochlear implant performance in children deafened by congenital cytomegalovirus-A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) infection is a major cause of sensorineural hearing loss in children. OBJECTIVE OF REVIEW: The objective of this systematic review was to compare performance in paediatric cochlear implant users with SNHL caused by cCMV compared to non-cCMV implantees. TYPE OF REVIEW: Systematic review SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane databases were searched from inception up to 15 May 2017 for children, cochlear implant, performance and their synonyms. EVALUATION METHODS: Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened for eligibility. Directness of evidence and risk of bias were assessed. From the included studies, study characteristics and outcome data (speech perception, speech production, receptive language and auditory performance of cCMV groups and non-cCMV groups) were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 5280 unique articles were screened of which 28 were eligible for critical appraisal. After critical appraisal, 12 studies remained for data extraction. Seven of 12 studies showed worse performance after cochlear implantation in cCMV children compared to non-cCMV children. Worse performance in cCMV children was attributed to cCMV-related comorbidities in six of these studies. Available data on asymptomatic cCMV children compared to non-cCMV children did not reveal an unfavourable effect on cochlear implant performance. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence reveals that cCMV children often have worse cochlear implant performance compared to non-cCMV children, which can be attributed to cCMV related comorbidities. We urge physicians to take into account the cCMV related comorbidities in the counselling of paediatric CI users deafened by cCMV.

The effect of side of implantation on unilateral cochlear implant performance in patients with prelingual and postlingual sensorineural hearing loss: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Cerebral lateralisation of language processing leads to a right ear advantage in normal hearing subjects. The aim of this study was to present a systematic overview of the effect of implantation side on postoperative cochlear implant performance in patients with symmetrical severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library databases. RESEARCH METHODS: Databases were searched from database inception up to 9 January 2017 for cochlear implant and side and all synonyms. Title, abstract and full-text of retrieved articles were screened for eligibility. Then, directness of evidence and risk of bias were assessed. For the included articles, study characteristics and outcome data (hearing and language development) were extracted. RESULTS: 2541 unique articles were screened, of which twenty were eligible for critical appraisal. No randomised controlled trials were identified. Twelve studies with a high directness of evidence remained for data extraction. Four of six studies including children with pre-lingual sensorineural hearing loss and four of seven studies investigating adults with postlingual sensorineural hearing loss found a right ear advantage in at least one outcome measurement related to cochlear implant performance. CONCLUSION: The available evidence on the effect of side of implantation is of low quality, as study populations and outcome measures are heterogeneous. The majority of studies reveals evidence for a right ear advantage in prelingually deafened children as well as postlingually deafened adults. In view of the present evidence and as no left ear advantage was identified, we cautiously advise implanting the cochlear implant in the right ear when other prognostic factors do not favour the left ear and sensorineural hearing loss is symmetrical.

Agreement between health utility instruments in cochlear implantation.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of our study were threefold: to compare health utility scores measured with different health utility instruments in adult patients with bilateral deafness, to compare the change in health utility scores after unilateral or bilateral cochlear implantation using the different health utility instruments and to assess which health utility instrument would be the most appropriate for future studies on cochlear implantation. DESIGN: A prospective study. SETTING: The data for this article were collected as part of a multicentre randomised controlled trial in the Netherlands on the benefits of simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation compared to unilateral cochlear implantation. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 38 adult patients with severe to profound bilateral post-lingual sensorineural hearing loss. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants completed various quality of life questionnaires (the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D), the Health Utilities Index mark 3 (HUI3), a visual analogue scale (VAS) for general quality of life and a VAS for hearing) preoperatively, and one and two years postoperatively. The general health utility instruments (EQ-5D, HUI3 and VAS general) were compared. RESULTS: The EQ-5D, HUI3 and VAS general utility scores differed significantly. The intraclass correlation coefficients showed poor to no agreement between these instruments. A gain in health utility after cochlear implantation was found with the HUI3 and VAS general. The highest gain in health utility was found with the HUI3. CONCLUSIONS: A health utility score depends on the health utility instrument that is used in a specific patient population. We recommend using the HUI3 in future studies on cochlear implantation.

Factors that influence outcomes in cochlear implantation in adults, based on patient-related characteristics - a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Outcomes in speech perception following cochlear implantation in adults vary widely. Many studies have been carried out to identify and quantify factors that influence outcomes. This study adds a new dimension to pre-existing literature. DESIGN: Single-centre retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 428 adults with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss, unilaterally implanted between February 1988 and March 2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were carried out to identify factors that may influence outcome after cochlear implantation. Consonant-vowel-consonant word scores were recorded pre- and post-implant and were used as outcome measure in two groups of patients (prelingually and postlingually deafened adults). As an added dimension, multiple imputation was implemented and evaluated to tackle 4% (17/407) missing data. RESULTS: For postlinguals, pre-implant speech perception score and age at onset of deafness are positive predictors and meningitis and otosclerosis as cause of deafness are negative predictors of post-implant speech perception. This model accounted for 26% of variance. For prelinguals, pre-implant speech perception score is the only strong positive predictor (ß 0.524; P < 0.001). This model accounted for 31% of variance. Age at implantation was not a significant predictor in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Speech perception is predicted by pre-implant speech perception, age at onset of deafness and aetiology (meningitis and otosclerosis) for postlinguals and solely pre-implant speech perception for prelinguals. Age at implantation is of lesser importance in predicting speech perception outcome post-implant. Multiple imputation is a useful statistical technique when analysing incomplete data sets.