首页> 外文期刊>Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery >Revision Cochlear Implantation With Device Manufacturer Conversion: Surgical Outcomes and Speech Perception Performance
【24h】

Revision Cochlear Implantation With Device Manufacturer Conversion: Surgical Outcomes and Speech Perception Performance

机译:设备制造商转换翻修人工耳蜗植入:手术结果和言语感知性能

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Abstract Objective Describe the clinical profile of revision cochlear implantation (RCI) cases involving device manufacturer conversion (RCImc+), compare them to cases without manufacturer conversion (RCImc?), and classify the reasons for manufacturer conversion (MC). Study Design Retrospective case review. Setting Tertiary academic center. Methods Data on demographics, RCI indications, medical background, surgical details, and the reasons for MC were collected for all RCIs from 1989 to 2020. Post‐RCI speech perception performance was categorized as unchanged, improved, or declined, according to clinically based criteria. Results Of 185 RCIs, 39 (21) involved MC, mostly in pediatric patients (67). The leading RCImc+ indications were device‐related (59) and medical (31) failures. Initial implant manufacturers were Advanced Bionics (49), Cochlear (25.5), or Medel (25.5). Most MC reasons were patient‐driven (64) versus CI team recommendations (36). The RCImc+ group demonstrated a 3‐fold higher rate of medical indications than RCImc? (31 vs?11.5, P?=?.007). The time interval from symptom onset to RCI was longer in RCImc+ (43 vs?20.3 months, P?=?.001), and the rate of multiple revisions in the same ear was higher (25.6 vs?8.2, P?=?.009). Complete reinsertion rates were high in both RCImc+ and RCImc? (94.8 vs?94.5, P?=?1) without any complications. Speech perception improved or remained unchanged in most (84) cases, with no significant difference between the groups (P?=?.183). Conclusion This retrospective study showed that RCI involving MC is safe and beneficial. Although RCImc+ patients exhibited distinct clinical characteristics, MC did not impact surgical or speech perception outcomes. This provides evidence‐based data to support informed decision‐making by CI teams and patients.
机译:摘要 目的 描述涉及设备制造商转换 (RCImc+) 的翻修人工耳蜗植入 (RCI) 病例的临床概况,将其与未制造商转换的病例 (RCImc?) 进行比较,并对制造商转换 (MC) 的原因进行分类。研究设计 回顾性病例回顾。设置高等教育中心。方法 收集 1989 年至 2020 年所有 RCI 的人口统计学、 RCI 适应症、医学背景、手术细节和 MC 原因数据。根据基于临床的标准,RCI 后言语感知表现被归类为不变、改善或下降。结果 在 185 例 RCI 中,39 例 (21%) 涉及 MC,主要为儿科患者 (67%)。RCImc+ 的主要适应证是设备相关 (59%) 和医疗 (31%) 失败。最初的植入物制造商是 Advanced Bionics (49%)、Cochlear (25.5%) 或 Medel (25.5%)。大多数 MC 原因是患者驱动的 (64%) 与 CI 团队的建议 (36%)。RCImc+ 组的医学适应症发生率是 RCImc?(31% 对 ?11.5%,P?=?。007). RCImc+ 从症状出现到 RCI 的时间间隔更长 (43 个月 vs?20.3 个月,P?=?.001),同一只耳朵的多次翻修率更高 (25.6% vs?8.2%,P?=?.009). RCImc+ 和 RCImc?(94.8% vs?94.5%,P?=?1) 无任何并发症。在大多数 (84%) 病例中,言语感知改善或保持不变,组间无显著差异 (P?=?.结论 这项回顾性研究表明,涉及 MC 的 RCI 是安全有益的。尽管 RCImc+ 患者表现出不同的临床特征,但 MC 不会影响手术或言语感知结果。这提供了基于证据的数据,以支持 CI 团队和患者做出明智的决策。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号