Search

Objective: To evaluate the benefit of cochlear implantation in patients with Pendred syndrome., Design: Retrospective study., Setting: Tertiary centre., Participants and Main Outcome Measures: Speech perception was measured using a phonetically balanced word list at a sound pressure level of 65 dB. Post-operative phoneme scores at 12-month for adults and 36-month for children with Pendred syndrome were compared to scores of patients with an enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) and a reference group with an unknown cause of hearing impairment. Quality of life was measured with the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire to evaluate the differences between pre- and post-implantation., Results: The mean post-operative phoneme scores were as follows: in the Pendred group, 91% (n = 16; SD = 10) for children and 78% (n = 7; SD = 14) for adults; in the reference group, 79% (n = 59; SD = 20) for children and 73% (n = 193; SD = 18) for adults; and in the EVA group, 84% (n = 6; SD = 7) for children and 66% (n = 12; SD = 22) for adults. A significant difference in speech perception was found between the children of the Pendred group and the reference group of 11.4% (SE = 5.2; P = 0.031). Between the adults, a difference of 11.2% (SE = 6.7; P = 0.094) was found. The difference between the Pendred group and the EVA group was 5.7%(SE = 4.5; P = 0.22) for children and 9.9% (SE = 8.7; P = 0.28) for adults. A significant improvement post-implantation in four of the six subdomains of the quality of life questionnaire was found: basic sound perception (P = 0.002), advanced sound perception (P = 0.004), speech production (P = 0.018) and activity limitations (P = 0.018). The two not significant subdomains were self-esteem (P = 0.164) and social interaction (P = 0.107)., Conclusions: After cochlear implantation, children with Pendred syndrome performed better than the reference group with respect to speech perception, however, adults performed similar. No significant differences were found between the Pendred and EVA group. Consequently, during pre-operative counselling, the two groups of patients may be considered comparable in terms of expected speech perception performance after cochlear implantation., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To analyse the benefit of cochlear implantation in young deaf children with Waardenburg syndrome (WS) compared to a reference group of young deaf children without additional disabilities., Method: A retrospective study was conducted on children with WS who underwent cochlear implantation at the age of 2 years or younger. The post-operative results for speech perception (phonetically balanced standard Dutch consonant-vocal-consonant word lists) and language comprehension (the Reynell Developmental Language Scales, RDLS), expressed as a language quotient (LQ), were compared between the WS group and the reference group by using multiple linear regression analysis., Results: A total of 14 children were diagnosed with WS, and 6 of them had additional disabilities. The WS children were implanted at a mean age of 1.6 years and the 48 children of the reference group at a mean age of 1.3 years. The WS children had a mean phoneme score of 80% and a mean LQ of 0.74 at 3 years post-implantation, and these results were comparable to those of the reference group. Only the factor additional disabilities had a significant negative influence on auditory perception and language comprehension., Conclusions: Children with WS performed similarly to the reference group in the present study, and these outcomes are in line with the previous literature. Although good counselling about additional disabilities concomitant to the syndrome is relevant, cochlear implantation is a good rehabilitation method for children with WS., (© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.)