Study on long-term performance evaluation of auditory and speech ability in cochlear implant in congenital deaf children with cochlear nerve deficiency after cochlear implantation

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2023.07.011

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective ·To evaluate the long-term performance and influencing factors of auditory and speech abilities, and social-life abilities in congenital deaf children with cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) after cochlear implant (CI) surgery. Methods ·Twenty-one CND children with CI implantation in Shanghai Ninth People′s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine were assigned to CND group, and twenty children with extremely severe sensorineural hearing loss with normal inner ear structure matching implantation age and CI use time of the CND group were selected as control group. The aided hearing threshold, Infant-toddler Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale (IT-MAIS), LittlEARS Auditory Questionnaire (LEAQ), Categories of Auditory Performance-Ⅱ (CAP-Ⅱ), Meaningful Use of Speech Scale (MUSS), Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR), closed and open disyllabic speech recognition test, and speech intelligibility test were used to hierarchically evaluate the subjects′ auditory and verbal abilities, and the Infant-junior Middle School Student′s Social Life Ability Scale (S-M Scale) was used to assess the subjects′ social-life ability. Results ·The average aided hearing threshold of each frequency point in the CND group was significantly worse than that of the control group (all P<0.05). In the CND group, 90.5% of children′s aided hearing threshold of all frequencies entered the Chinese banana map. The auditory and speech abilities of the CND group were worse than those of the control group, and the significant differences between the two groups were found in the results of IT-MAIS, CAP-Ⅱ, MUSS, SIR, and closed and open disyllabic speech recognition (all P<0.05), but not in LEAQ. The social-life ability of the CND group was worse than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no correlation between implantation age, usage time of CI, auditory and language rehabilitation time, and auditory and speech ability of the CND group. Conclusion ·CI is an effective auditory intervention method for children with CND, but their average auditory and speech abilities and social-life abilities are significantly behind those of CI users with normal inner ear structure. Therefore, for CND children, individualized communication strategies and rehabilitation training methods should be emphasized, and the cultivation of social-life ability and psychological guidance should be strengthened.

Key words: cochlear nerve deficiency, cochlear implant, auditory and speech ability, social-life ability

CLC Number:

R764.43⁺1

YANG Lu, HUANG Meiping, ZHOU Qian, LI Jin, LI Yun, HUANG Zhiwu. Study on long-term performance evaluation of auditory and speech ability in cochlear implant in congenital deaf children with cochlear nerve deficiency after cochlear implantation[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Medical Science), 2023, 43(7): 890-897.

Figures/Tables 7

TrendMD

References 23

1	MCCLAY J E, BOOTH T N, PARRY D A, et al. Evaluation of pediatric sensorineural hearing loss with magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2008, 134(9): 945-952.
2	GLASTONBURY C M, DAVIDSON H C, HARNSBERGER H R, et al. Imaging findings of cochlear nerve deficiency[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2002, 23(4): 635-643.
3	PENG K A, KUAN E C, HAGAN S, et al. Cochlear nerve aplasia and hypoplasia: predictors of cochlear implant success[J]. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2017, 157(3): 392-400.
4	VESSEUR A, FREE R, SNELS C, et al. Hearing restoration in cochlear nerve deficiency: the choice between cochlear implant or auditory brainstem implant, a meta-analysis[J]. Otol Neurotol, 2018, 39(4): 428-437.
5	REN C C, LIN Y, XU Z, et al. Audiological characteristics and cochlear implant outcome in children with cochlear nerve deficiency[J]. Front Neurol, 2022, 13: 1080381.
6	SÜRMELIOĞLU O, CETIK F, TARKAN O, et al. Choice of cochlear implant side in a paediatric population[J]. J Laryngol Otol, 2014, 128(6): 504-507.
7	STRELNIKOV K, ROUGER J, LAGLEYRE S, et al. Improvement in speech-reading ability by auditory training: evidence from gender differences in normally hearing, deaf and cochlear implanted subjects[J]. Neuropsychologia, 2009, 47(4): 972-979.
8	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 声学测听方法第1部分:纯音气导和骨导测听法: GB/T 16296.1—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
	General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People′s Republic of China, Standardization Administration of PRC. Acoustics-Audiometric test methods-Part 1: pure-tone air and bone conduction audiometry[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2018.
9	郑芸, 孟照莉, 王恺, 等. 普通话早期言语感知测试(MESP)[J]. 中国听力语言康复科学杂志, 2011(5): 19-23.
	ZHENG Y, MENG Z L, WANG K, et al. Mandarin Early Speech Perception Test[J]. Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation, 2011(5): 19-23.
10	ZHENG Y, MENG Z L, WANG K, et al. Development of the Mandarin early speech perception test: children with normal hearing and the effects of dialect exposure[J]. Ear Hear, 2009, 30(5): 600-612.
11	李淑静, 刘海红, 孔颖, 等. 普通话词汇相邻性词表在人工耳蜗植入儿童中的等价性验证[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2013, 21(3): 217-220.
	LI S J, LIU H H, KONG Y, et al. Inter-list equivalency of standard-Chinese lexical neighborhood test in cochlear implant children[J]. Journal of Audiology and Speech Pathology, 2013, 21(3): 217-220.
12	孙喜斌. 听力障碍儿童听觉、语言能力评估标准及方法[M]. 北京: 三辰影库音像出版社, 2011.
	SUN X B. Criteria and methods for evaluating auditory and language ability of hearing-impaired children[M]. Beijing: Sanchen Library Audio & Video Publishing House, 2011.
13	梁思玉, 李刚, 郑芸. 婴幼儿有意义听觉整合量表的应用现状与展望[J]. 中华耳科学杂志, 2015, 13(4): 631-635.
	LIANG S Y, LI G, ZHENG Y. Current usage of IT-MAIS and its future[J]. Chinese Journal of Otology, 2015, 13(4): 631-635.
14	王丽燕, 梁巍, 陈军兰, 等. 中文版«小龄儿童听觉发展问卷»的有效性研究[J]. 中国听力语言康复科学杂志, 2011(2): 43-46.
	WANG L Y, LIANG W, CHEN J L, et al. A study on the effectiveness of Chinese version of LittlEARS Auditory Questionnaire[J]. Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation, 2011(2): 43-46.
15	王丽燕, 申敏, 梁巍, 等. 扩展版CAP问卷的中文版开发及其信效度研究[J]. 中国听力语言康复科学杂志, 2020, 18(5): 367-369.
	WANG L Y, SHEN M, LIANG W, et al. The development of Chinese version of the revised Categories of Auditory Performance and the study of its reliability and validity[J]. Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation, 2020, 18(5): 367-369.
16	郭倩倩, 陈雪清, 孟超, 等. 3~6岁儿童人工耳蜗植入后听觉言语能力发育规律探讨[J]. 中国听力语言康复科学杂志, 2016, 14(4): 255-258.
	GUO Q Q, CHEN X Q, MENG C, et al. The development of auditory and speech abilities in preschool children after cochlear implantation[J]. Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation, 2016, 14(4): 255-258.
17	王宇, 潘滔, 米思, 等. 中文版言语可懂度分级标准的建立及其信度检验[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2013, 21(5): 465-468.
	WANG Y, PAN T, MI S, et al. The reliability analysis of the Chinese version of Speech Intelligibility Rate (SIR) [J]. Journal of Audiology and Speech Pathology, 2013, 21(5): 465-468.
18	左启华. 婴儿-初中生社会生活能力量表[M]. 北京: 北京医科大学出版社, 1988: 1-68.
	ZUO Q H. Infant-junior middle school student′s social life ability scale[M]. Beijing: Beijing Medical University Press, 1988: 1-68.
19	HU X J, LI F F, LAU C C. Development of the Mandarin speech banana[J]. Int J Speech Lang Pathol, 2019, 21(4): 404-411.
20	GRANT K W, SEITZ P F. The use of visible speech cues for improving auditory detection of spoken sentences[J]. J Acoust Soc Am, 2000, 108(3 Pt 1): 1197-1208.
21	SCARABELLO E M, LAMÔNICA D A C, MORETTIN-ZUPELARI M, et al. Language evaluation in children with pre-lingual hearing loss and cochlear implant[J]. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol, 2020, 86(1): 91-98.
22	RAYES H, AL-MALKY G, VICKERS D. Systematic review of auditory training in pediatric cochlear implant recipients[J]. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 2019, 62(5): 1574-1593.
23	胡跃楠. 听力障碍儿童的社会生活能力[D]. 苏州: 苏州大学, 2015.
	HU Y N. The social-life ability in hearing-impaired children[D]. Suzhou: Soochow University, 2015.

Item	CND group (n=21)	Control group (n=20)
Implantation age/year	1.69±0.84^①	1.46±0.72
Usage time of CI/year	8.05±2.19^②	8.03±19.6
Gender (male/female) /n (%)	16 (76.2)/5 (23.8)	9 (45.0)/11 (55.0)
Operative side (double/left/right) /n (%)	4 (19.0)/8 (38.1)/9 (42.9)	3 (15.0)/2 (10.0)/15 (75.0)
Preoperatively implanted ear hearing	>95 dBnHL	>95 dBnHL
CI brand /n (%)
MeDEL	10 (47.6)	15 (75.0)
Cochlear	8 (38.1)	4 (20.0)
AB	2 (9.5)	1 (5.0)
NuroTRon	1 (4.8)	0 (0)
Auditory and language rehabilitation time/year	4.90±2.37	N/A

Item	CND group (n=21)	Control group (n=20)
Implantation age/year	1.69±0.84^①	1.46±0.72
Usage time of CI/year	8.05±2.19^②	8.03±19.6
Gender (male/female) /n (%)	16 (76.2)/5 (23.8)	9 (45.0)/11 (55.0)
Operative side (double/left/right) /n (%)	4 (19.0)/8 (38.1)/9 (42.9)	3 (15.0)/2 (10.0)/15 (75.0)
Preoperatively implanted ear hearing	>95 dBnHL	>95 dBnHL
CI brand /n (%)
MeDEL	10 (47.6)	15 (75.0)
Cochlear	8 (38.1)	4 (20.0)
AB	2 (9.5)	1 (5.0)
NuroTRon	1 (4.8)	0 (0)
Auditory and language rehabilitation time/year	4.90±2.37	N/A

Frequency	CND group (n=20)	Control group (n=20)	P value
Left ear
0.5 kHz	46.25±14.00	29.00±4.18	0.018
1 kHz	45.41±11.37	28.00±2.73	0.005
2 kHz	42.08±10.10	25.00±3.54	0.002
4 kHz	38.75±7.42	24.00±8.21	0.002
Right ear
0.5 kHz	44.17±5.97	33.61±6.37	0.000
1 kHz	44.17±7.93	32.78±5.20	0.000
2 kHz	42.08±6.89	29.44±7.84	0.000
4 kHz	41.67±7.18	27.50±6.70	0.000

Frequency	CND group (n=20)	Control group (n=20)	P value
Left ear
0.5 kHz	46.25±14.00	29.00±4.18	0.018
1 kHz	45.41±11.37	28.00±2.73	0.005
2 kHz	42.08±10.10	25.00±3.54	0.002
4 kHz	38.75±7.42	24.00±8.21	0.002
Right ear
0.5 kHz	44.17±5.97	33.61±6.37	0.000
1 kHz	44.17±7.93	32.78±5.20	0.000
2 kHz	42.08±6.89	29.44±7.84	0.000
4 kHz	41.67±7.18	27.50±6.70	0.000

Item	CND group (n=21)	Control group (n=20)	P value
MESP/%
CI	75.8±37.4	100.0±0	0.008
CI+lip reading	83.0±32.7^①	100.0±0	0.027
M-LNT/%
CI	29.5±30.8	98.3±3.4	0.000
CI+lip reading	39.3±38.1^②	98.8±2.8	0.000
Speech intelligibility test/%	43.1±36.2	99.1±2.9	0.000