The outcome of cochlear implantation among children with genetic syndromes

Abstract

Objective

To assess the outcome and efficacy of cochlear implantation in children with genetic syndromes.

Method

Study design: case–control study.

Setting

A cochlear implantation tertiary referral center.

Patients

All pediatric cochlear implantation recipients with Waardenburg syndrome, Usher syndrome, Dandy–Walker syndrome, or albinism. A control group was appropriately matched to the syndromic group with regard to age at implantation and duration of device use.

Intervention

Cochlear implantation.

Main outcome measures

Subjects’ auditory abilities, speech intelligibility, and pure tone thresholds were compared between the syndromic and non-syndromic group.

Results

A total of 25 subjects (13 syndromic and 12 non-syndromic) participated in the study. Neither auditory ability nor speech intelligibility scores differed significantly by group. The final PTA of both the groups showed normal-to-mild hearing loss: 26 dB HL in the syndromic group and 23 dB HL for the control group.

Conclusions

Cochlear implant recipients with genetic syndromes achieved similar levels auditory perception and speech intelligibility as their peers with a genetic syndrome. The presence of any of the genetic syndromes described herein should not be a contraindication to cochlear implant provision, as it would have a positive impact on the patients’ sensory perception and lifestyle.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    Billings KR, Kenna MA (1999) Causes of pediatric sensorineural hearing loss: yesterday and today. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 125(5):517–521

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Lalwani AK, Castelein CM (1999) Cracking the auditory genetic code: nonsyndromic hereditary hearing impairment. Am J Otolaryngol 20(1):115–132

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Morton CC, Nance WE (2006) Newborn hearing screening—a silent revolution. N Engl J Med 354(20):2151–2164

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Marres H. 1998. Congenital abnormalities of the inner ear. In Ludman L, Wright T (eds) Diseases of the ear, 6th edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 288–294

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Friedman I (1997) Pathology of the Cochlea. In: Booth JB (ed) Scott–Brown’s otolaryngology, vol 3: otology. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp 3/4/1–3/4/61

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Raghunandhan S, Kameswaran M, Anand Kumar RS, Agarwal AK, Hossain MD (2014) A study of complications and morbidity profile in cochlear implantation: the MERF experience. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 66(Suppl1):161–168

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Cooper H (1991) Cochlear implants: a practical guide, 1st edn. Wiley Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bahmad F Jr, Merchant SN, Nadol JB Jr, Tranebjaerg L (2007) Otopathology in Mohr–Tranebjaerg syndrome. Laryngoscope 117(7):1202–1208

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Oghalai JS, Caudle SE, Bentley B et al (2012) Cognitive outcomes and familial stress after cochlear implantation in deaf children with and without developmental delays. Otol Neurotol 33(6):947–956

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Wiley S, Meinzen-Derr J, Grether S, Choo DI, Hughes ML (2012) Longitudinal functional performance among children with cochlear implants and disabilities: a prospective study using the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 76(5):693–697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Archbold S, Lutman ME, Nikolopoulos T (1998) Categories of auditory performance: inter-user reliability. Br J Audiol 32(1):7–12

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Allen MC, Nikolopoulos TP, O’Donoghue GM (1998) Speech intelligibility in children after cochlear implantation. Am J Otol 19(6):742–746

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Allen C, Nikolopoulos TP, Dyar D, O’Donoghue GM (2001) Reliability of a rating scale for measuring speech intelligibility after pediatric cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 22(5):631–633

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Berrettini S, Forli F, Genovese E et al (2008) Cochlear implantation in deaf children with associated disabilities: challenges and outcomes. Int J Audiol 47(4):199–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Daneshi A, Hassanzadeh S (2007) Cochlear implantation in prelingually deaf persons with additional disability. J Laryngol Otol 121(7):635–638

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Edwards LC (2007) Children with cochlear implants and complex needs: a review of outcome research and psychological practice. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 12(3):258–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Wiley S, Jahnke M, Meinzen-Derr J, Choo D (2005) Perceived qualitative benefits of cochlear implants in children with multi-handicaps. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 69(6):791–798

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Uziel M, Mondain J, Reid J (1995) European procedures and considerations in children’s cochlear implant program. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 166:212–215

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Archbold S, Athalye S, Mulla I et al (2015) Cochlear implantation in children with complex needs: the perceptions of professionals at cochlear implant centres. Cochlear Implants Int 16(6):303–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Bajaj Y, Gibbins N, Fawkes K et al (2012) Surgical aspects of cochlear implantation in syndromic children. Cochlear Implants Int 13(3):163–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Broomfield SJ, Bruce IA, Henderson L, Ramsden RT, Green KM (2013) Cochlear implantation in children with syndromic deafness. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 77(8):1312–1316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Archbold S, Lutman ME, Marshall DH (1995) Categories of auditory performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 166:312–314

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Vernon M (1969) Sociological and psychological factors associated with hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res 12(3):541–563

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Pingault V, Faubert E, Baral V et al (2015) SOX10 mutations mimic isolated hearing loss. Clin Genet 88(4):352–359

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Madden C, Halsted MJ, Hopkin RJ, Choo DI, Benton C, Greinwald JH Jr (2003) Temporal bone abnormalities associated with hearing loss in Waardenburg syndrome. Laryngoscope 113(11):2035–2041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    de Oliveira AK, Hamerschmidt R, Mocelin M, Rezende RK (2012) Cochlear implantation in patient with Dandy–Walker syndrome. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 16(3):406–409

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Cox GF, Fulton AB (2010) Albinism. In: Levin LA, Albert DM (eds) Ocular diseases: mechanisms and management. Elsevier/Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 461–471

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Morell R, Spritz RA, Ho L et al (1997) Apparent digenic inheritance of Waardenburg syndrome type 2 (WS2) and autosomal recessive ocular albinism (AROA). Hum Mol Genet 6(5):659–664

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Lezirovitz K, Nicastro FS, Pardono E et al (2006) Is autosomal recessive deafness associated with oculocutaneous albinism a “coincidence syndrome”? J Hum Genet 51(8):716–720

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Tak WJ, Kim MN, Hong CK, Ro BI, Song KY, Seo SJ (2004) Ocular albinism with sensorineural deafness. Int J Dermatol 43(4):290–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Farid Alzhrani.

Ethics declarations

Funding

There are no funders to report for this submission.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alzhrani, F., Alhussini, R., Hudeib, R. et al. The outcome of cochlear implantation among children with genetic syndromes. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 275, 365–369 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4832-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cochlear implant
  • Waardenburg syndrome
  • Usher syndrome
  • Dandy–Walker syndrome
  • Albinism
  • Deafness
  • Hearing loss