Zusammenfassung
Die Versorgung mit einem Cochlear implant (CI) stellt eine neue Behandlungsform in der Rehabilitation der einseitigen Taubheit dar. Vor Indikationsstellung zur CI-Versorgung sind die Aufklärung der Patienten über die Rehabilitationsalternativen und eine gründliche Voruntersuchung notwendig. Bislang haben wir 28 Patienten mit einem CI versorgt. Das Sprachverständnis im Störgeräusch und das Lokalisationsvermögen waren bei 11 Patienten 12 Monate nach CI-Implantation im Vergleich zu konventionellen CROS-Hörgeräten („contralateral routing of signal“), dem BAHA („bone-anchored hearing aid“) und der unversorgten Situation signifikant besser. Zusätzlich ermittelten wir das subjektive Handicap („Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly“, HHIE) und den subjektiven Erfolg („International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids“, IOI-HA; „Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale“, SSQ) nach jeder Versorgungsoption, auch hierbei zeigte sich ein deutlicher Nutzen durch das CI. Die sorgfältige Patientenselektion ist ein entscheidender Faktor für die erfolgreiche Therapie. Dann ist mit einem CI bei einseitiger Ertaubung eine signifikante Verbesserung des Sprachverständnisses und des Lokalisationsvermögens möglich.
Abstract
Cochlear implantation (CI) is a new form of treatment in the rehabilitation of single-sided deafness. The patient requires thorough initial examination and a full explanation of alternative treatment options prior to determining the indication for CI treatment. To date, we have treated 28 patients with CI, of whom data are available for 11 after 12 months. We examined speech comprehension in background noise and localisation ability 12 months after CI implantation compared to conventional CROS (contralateral routing of signal) hearing aids, BAHA (bone-anchored hearing aid) and hearing in untreated patients. In addition, we determined the subjective handicap (HHIE, hearing handicap inventory for the elderly) and the subjective success (IOI-HA, international outcome inventory for hearing aids; SSQ, spatial and qualities of hearing scale) of each treatment option. After 12 months’ experience, the results show a significantly better localisation ability and an improvement in speech comprehension in background noise with CI than with the other treatment options. Subjective results also show a clear benefit with CI. Careful patient selection is a decisive factor for successful treatment of this patient group. Under these conditions, CI is a treatment option with which significant improvement in speech comprehension and localization ability in single-sided deafness is possible.
Literatur
Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Laszig R et al (2011) Comparison of pseudobinaural hearing to real binaural hearing rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus. Otol Neurotol 32(1):39–47
Arnoldner C, Helbig S, Wagenblast J et al (2010) Electric acoustic stimulation in patients with postlingual severe high-frequency hearing loss: clinical experience. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 67:116–124
Bertoli S, Probst R, Jordan P (1996) Hearing handicap – an addition to audiometric hearing loss. Results of an exploratory study of auditory communication disorders in the elderly. HNO 44(7):376–384
Bess FH, Tharpe AM (1988) Performance and management of children with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Scand Audiol Suppl 30:75–79
Buechner A, Brendel M, Lesinski-Schiedat A et al (2010) Cochlear implantation in unilateral deaf subjects associated with ipsilateral tinnitus. Otol Neurotol 31(9):1381–1385
Cox RM, Alexander GC (2000) Expectations about hearing aids and their relationship to fitting outcome. J Am Acad Audiol 11(7):368–382
Eapen RJ, Buss E, Adunka MC et al (2009) Hearing-in-noise benefits after bilateral simultaneous cochlear implantation continue to improve 4 years after implantation. Otol Neurotol 30:153–159
Gantz BJ, Turner C, Gfeller K (2004) Expanding cochlear implant technology: Combined electrical and acoustical speech processing. Cochlear Implants Int 5(Suppl 1):8–14
Gatehouse S, Noble W (2004) The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 43(2):85–99
Hochmair Desoyer I, Schulz E et al (1997) The HSM Sentence Test as a tool for evaluating the speech understanding in noise of cochlear implant users. Am J Otol 18(Suppl 6):83
Iwaki T, Blamey P, Kubo T (2008) Bimodal studies using adaptive dynamic range optimization (ADRO) technology. Int J Audiol 47:311–318
Laske RD, Veraguth D, Dillier N et al (2009) Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Otol Neurotol 30:313–318
Laszig R, Aschendorff A, Stecker M et al (2004) Benefits of bilateral electrical stimulation with the nucleus cochlear implant in adults: 6-month postoperative results. Otol Neurotol 25(6):958–968
Lenarz T, Ver T, Buechner A et al (2009) Hearing conservation surgery using the hybrid-L electrode. Audiol Neurootol 14:22–31
Lieu JE (2004) Speech-language and educational consequences of unilateral hearing loss in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130(5):524–530
Probst R (2008) Cochlear implantation for unilateral deafness? HNO 56:886–888
Quaranta N, Wagstaff S, Baguley DM (2004) Tinnitus and cochlear implantation. Int J Audiol 43(5):245–251
Ruscetta MN, Arjmand EM, Pratt SR (2005) Speech recognition abilities in noise for children with severe-to-profound unilateral hearing impairment. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 69(6):771–779
Schoen F, Mueller J, Helms J, Nopp P (2005) Sound localization and sensitivity to interaural cues in bilateral users of the Med-El Combi 40/40+cochlear implant system. Otol Neurotol 26(3):429–437
Slattery WH III, Middlebrooks JC (1994) Monaural sound localization: acute versus chronic unilateral impairment. Hear Res 75(1–2):38–46
Sucher CM, McDermott HJ (2009) Bimodal stimulation: benefits for music perception and sound quality. Cochlear Implants Int 10(Suppl 1):96–99
Tharpe AM (2008) Unilateral and mild bilateral hearing loss in children: past and current perspectives. Trends Amplif 12(1):7–15
van den Broek E, Dunnebier EA (2009) Cochlear implantation in postlingually hearing-impaired adults: choosing the most appropriate ear. Int J Audiol 48(9):618–624
Van Wanrooij MM, Van Opstal AJ (2004) Contribution of head shadow and pinna cues to chronic monaural sound localization. J Neurosci 24(17):4163–4171
Vermeire K, Van de Heyning HP (2009) Binaural hearing after cochlear implantation in subjects with unilateral sensorineural deafness and tinnitus. Audiol Neurootol 14(3):163–171
Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B (1999) Development and evaluation of a German sentence test: Part III. Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test. Z Audiol 38:86–95
Weinstein BE, Spitzer JB, Ventry IM (1986) Test-retest reliability of the hearing handicap inventory for the elderly. Ear Hear 7(5):295–299
Wie OB, Pripp AH, Tvete O (2010) Unilateral deafness in adults: effects on communication and social interaction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 119(11):772–781
Interessenkonflikt
Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arndt, S., Laszig, R., Aschendorff, A. et al. Einseitige Taubheit und Cochlear-implant-Versorgung. HNO 59, 437–446 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-011-2318-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-011-2318-8