- Original article
- Open Access
Study of telemetry changes over time in children with a cochlear implant
The Egyptian Journal of Otolaryngology volume 34, pages198–202(2018)
Cochlear implant (CI) is an electronic device that provides direct electrical stimulation to the auditory division of the eighth cranial nerve. The integrity of the internal CI part after implantation can be assessed through objective measures, which are a widely used and valuable tool in the field of CIs. Impedance measurement and electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) are the most frequently used tests to facilitate programming of the implants especially in young children.
This study was carried out to compare ECAP thresholds and electrode impedance at the time of surgery, at the first stimulation session, and monthly for the next 2 months to assess whether a significant change take places with time.
Patients and Methods
Fifteen deaf children implanted unilaterally with a MED-EL Sonata Implant System with an Opus 2 speech processor were included in this study. All patients received the implant if they fulfilled the Alexandria main hospital criteria for receiving CIs. The group studied included seven males and eight females; they ranged in age from 2 to 6 years. Two of the patients had received implantation in the left ear, whereas the rest of the patients had received a CI in the right ear.
Intraoperative impedance was the lowest among all postoperative readings in all electrodes. The highest value was that measured 1 month after surgery, after which impedance values continued to decrease significantly, but not to the intraoperative values. The ECAP threshold showed no significant P values between the ECAP threshold measured in the intraoperative and the postsurgery follow-up period.
The measured impedance showed significant changes in the form of increasing values postoperatively relative to the intraoperative time. The ECAP threshold did not change significantly intraoperatively and postoperatively, showing that intraoperative ECAP can be useful in mapping as it shows no changes.
Bierer JA, Faulkner KF. Identifying cochlear implant channels with poor electrode-neuron interface: partial tripolar, single-channel thresholds and psychophysical tuning curves. Ear Hear 2010; 31:247–258.
Zwolan TA. Implants hearing devices. In: Katz J, Chasin M, English K, Hood JL, Tiller LK, editors. Hand book of clinical audiology. 7th ed. UK: Wolters Kluwer 2015. pp. 819–820.
Brill S, Müller J, Hagen R, Möltner A, Brockmeier SJ, Stark T, et al. Site of cochlear stimulation and its effect on electrically evoked compound action potentials using the MED-EL standard electrode array. Biomed Eng Online 2009; 8:40.
Manolache O. Electrical impedance variation values in patient with cochlear implant, Romanian. J Oral Rehabil 2012; 4:22–28.
Sainz M, Roldan C, de la Torre A, Gonzalez M, Ruiz J. Transitory alterations of the electrode impedances in cochlear implants associated to middle and inner ear diseases. Int Congr Ser 2003; 1240:407–410.
Dorman MF, Smith LM, Dankowski K, McCandless G, Parkin JL. Long-term measures of electrode impedance and auditory thresholds for the Ineraid cochlear implant. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 35:1126–1130.
Henkin Y, Kaplan-Neeman R, Muchnik C, Kronenberg J, Hildesheimer M. Changes over time in electrical stimulation levels and electrode impedance values in children using the Nucleus 24M cochlear implant. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2003; 67:873–880.
Wolf-Magele A, Schnabl J, Edlinger S, Pok SM, Schoerg P, Sprinzl GM. Postoperative changes in telemetry measurements after cochlear implantation and its impact on early activation. Clin Otolaryngol 2015; 40:527–534.
Hughes ML, Vander Werff KR, Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Kelsay DM, Teagle HF, et al. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 2001; 22:471–486.
Abbas PJ, Brown CJ, Shallop JK, Firszt JB, Hughes ML, Hong SH, et al. Summary of results using the nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear 1999; 20:45–59.
Fei J, Ke L, Shi-Ming Y. Clinical application of electrically evoked compound action potentials. J Otol 2014; 9:117–121.
Lai WK, Aksit M, Akdas F, Dillier N. Longitudinal behavior of neural response telemetry (NRT) data and clinical implications. Int J Audiol 2004; 43:252–263.
Tanamati LF, Bevilacqua MC, Costa OA. Longitudinal study of the ECAP measured in children with cochlear implants. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2009; 75:90–96.
Gordon K, Papsin B, Harrison R. Toward a battery of behavioral and objective measures to achieve optimal cochlear implant stimulation levels in children. Ear Hear 2004; 25:447–463.
Telmesani LM, Said NM. Electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) in cochlear implant children: changes In auditory nerve response in first year of cochlear implant use. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 82:28–33.
Kotz S, Balakrishnan N, Read CB, Vidakovic B. Encyclopedia of statistical sciences. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Interscience 2006.
Kirkpatrick LA, Feeney BC. A simple guide to IBM SPSS statistics for version 20.0, Student ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning 2013.
Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Etlert CP, O’Brient S, Oleson JJ. Effects of long term use of a cochlear implant on the electrically evoked compound action potential. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21:5–15.
This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
About this article
Cite this article
Asal, S.I., Sobhy, O.A. & Massad, N.D. Study of telemetry changes over time in children with a cochlear implant. Egypt J Otolaryngol 34, 198–202 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4103/ejo.ejo_56_17
- electrically evoked compound action potential