RESUMO
Introduction: Cochlear implants (CI) provide a hearing sense for severe to profound hearing-impaired patients, both adults and children, and they are a broadly effective and accepted therapeutic method for those patients. Also, Deaf children with comorbidities, including autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), undergo cochlear implantation. ASDs are a group of developing disorders characterized by abnormalities in social interaction and communication with limited repetitive patterns of behavior. This study aimed to assess the effect of Autism on CI surgery outcomes in Deaf Children. Materials and Methods: We followed 12 autistic patients with cochlear implantation and 12 non-autistic cochlear-implanted patients for two years. The Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) and Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) scores were used to assess 6, 12, and 24 months after cochlear implantation surgery. Results: During the 24-month follow-up, the CAP means scores increased in both groups, and SIR and CAP progresses were considerably greater in non-ASD children (P<0.001). However, in ASD children, the progress of CAP and SIR variables were significant, with 99% and 95% confidence, respectively, at 24 months after surgery. Conclusion: Although the CIs could improve hearing performance in autistic patients, speech development after CIs in autistic children could affected by several factors, including the severity of autism, and this can be effective in providing pre-implant counseling to parents. The application of the alternative communication methods could be taken into account as a potential rehab technique.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Cochlear implantation (CI) is now regarded as a standard treatment for children with severe to profound sensor neural hearing loss. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of the round window approach (RWA) and standard cochleostomy approach (SCA) in the preservation of residual hearing after CI in pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted on 97 pediatric patients receiving CI with 12-month follow-up. The study population was divided into two groups according to the surgical approaches they received, including RWA and SCA. Consequently, the patients were evaluated based on the Categories of Auditory Performance scale (CAP) and Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test 45-60 days and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-surgery. RESULTS: The CAP and SIR mean scores increased in both groups during the 12-month follow-up. This upward trend was significant in both groups (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in any of the follow-up stages regarding the CAP mean score. The mean SIR score (P=1.14±0.40) was significantly higher in the RWA group 3(P=0.001), 6(P=0.008), and 9(P=0.006) months after the surgery. However, there was no significant difference between the RWA and SCA groups, regarding 1-year SIR (P=0.258). CONCLUSION: The CI with either RWA or SCA could improve hearing and speech performance in pediatric patients. Although mid-term speech intelligibility was better for RWA, there was no significant difference in the 1-year outcome between these two methods.
