Fakülteler / Faculties

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11727/1395

Browse

Filters

2016 - 201912020 - 20222

Settings

Subject: search.filters.subject.cochlear ossification

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Auditory Brainstem Implant in Postlingual Postmeningitic Patients
    (2016) Bayazit, Yildirim; Kosaner, Julie; Celenk, Fatih; Somdas, Mehmet; Yilmaz, Ismail; Altin, Gokhan; Cevizci, Rasit; Yavuz, Haluk; Ozluoglu, Levent; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3320-204X; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2150-0237; 26485185; F-6315-2015; AAI-8020-2021
    Objectives/HypothesisThe aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of postlingual postmeningitic patients who received an auditory brainstem implant (ABI). Study DesignRetrospective analysis was performed on postlingual postmeningitic patients with bilateral profound sensorineural hearing loss who underwent ABI between the years 2007 and 2014 MethodsAll patients were postlingually deaf due to cochlear ossification as a consequence of bacterial meningitis. The patients received a MED-EL or Neurelec ABI. All patients were operated on at different hospitals by the same primary surgeon. The patients were tested using Ling 5 sound detection, sound field implant thresholds between 250 Hz and 6 kHz, and 6 to 12 choice closed-set word and sentence tests. ResultsNine patients with postmeningitic cochlear ossification received an ABI. Five of nine ABI users (55.5%) wear their audio processors (AP) most of the time. Four (44.5%) with no perceivable benefit have become nonusers. Three of the five consistent ABI users reported good benefit. The other two ABI users who do wear their APs do not respond to sound in daily living but reported benefits such as feeling sound in a good way. ConclusionsIn this study, five of nine patients (55.5%) with bilateral ossified cochlea had some degree of benefit from their ABI. An ABI may be useful in hearing restoration in postlingual patients with bilateral ossified cochlea due to meningitis. However, poor results may be related to side effects, which may necessitate deactivation of electrodes, long duration of auditory deprivation, or impairments in the auditory neural structures as a result of meningitis. Level of Evidence4. Laryngoscope, 126:1889-1892, 2016
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Surgical Methods and Auditory Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Cochlear Ossification
    (2022) Tokat, Taskin; Catli, Tolgahan; Bozkurt, Ergul Basaran; Olgun, Levent; 35193846
    BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical and auditory outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with cochlear ossification. METHODS: This study comprised 54 patients with cochlear ossification who underwent cochlear implantation in the cochlear implant center of a tertiary care hospital between January 1998 and May 2019. Clinical data were evaluated including surgical findings and audiological performances. The auditory outcomes of the implanted patients were assessed through the Categories of Auditory Performance-II test and Speech Intelligibility Rating test, respectively. The outcomes of patients with cochlear ossification were compared with those of 54 patients selected for the control group who underwent implantation with no cochlear ossification. RESULTS: Auditory outcomes were comparable between the study group and the control group. The control group obtained significantly higher scores than those of the study group when compared using the Categories of Auditory Performance-II test and Speech Intelligibility Rating test batteries. Patients with meningitis produced poorer outcomes within the group comparisons of the study group. None of the patients experienced surgical complications. The extent of ossification was analyzed in terms of its effectiveness on audiological performance. Patients with complete ossification had significantly lower Categories of Auditory Performance-II and Speech Intelligibility Rating test scores. CONCLUSION: Cochlear implantation is a safe and beneficial procedure, even in patients with cochlear ossification. The ossified cochlea may require varied drill techniques beyond traditional implantation surgery for the insertion of the electrode array. It is, however, still difficult to predict audiological outcomes in patients with cochlear ossification.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Surgical considerations and audiological results of cochlear implantation in patient with otosclerosis
    (2020) Catli, Tolgahan; Tokat, Taskin; Bozkurt, Ergul Basaran; Adibelli, Zehra Hilal; Ergun, Ugurtan; Altas, Enver; Olgun, Levent; 32283908
    Background/aim: To emphasize the role of cochlear implantation (CI) in the auditory rehabilitation of patients with otosclerosis (OS) and share our surgical experiences on this rare group of patients. Materials and methods: Retrospective analysis of the patients who have a diagnosis of otosclerosis and implanted between January 1998-May 2019 was performed. Preoperative and postoperative clinical, radiological, audiological and surgical findings are presented. Results: Among 2195 patients who have been implanted in our institution, 12 (0.54%) met the diagnostic criteria of OS according to their preoperative (clinical, radiological, audiological) and peroperative (surgical) findings. Electrode insertion was performed via "round window membrane and cochleostomy" in 8 and 4 patients, respectively. No major complications occured. All patients showed satisfactory performances by means of audiometric scores postoperatively. Nonauditory stimulation (NAS) which manifested as "facial twitching" was a challenging problem in one patient during the surgery and subsided after the operation. Conclusion: Our experience on CI in patients with OS revealed that the implantation was a relatively safe procedure and had satisfactory impact on audiological performances.