Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  15 / 264 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 15 / 264 Next Page
Page Background

C.

Single-sided deafness

Finbow J, Bance M, Aiken S, et al. A comparison between wireless CROS and bone-anchored

hearing devices for single-sided deafness: a pilot study.

Otol Neurotol

. 2015; 36(5):819-825.

EBM level 2........................................................................................................................148-154

Summary

: This study compared outcomes with a wireless contralateral routing of signal

(CROS) hearing aid to those with a bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD) in patients with

single-sided deafness. A within-subject design was used to compare the two devices with

regard to head shadow effect reduction, speech perception in quiet and noise, and self-

assessment questionnaires. Results showed no significant difference between the two devices

on either objective or subjective outcome measures.

Sladen DP, Frisch CD, Carlson ML, et al. Cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness: a

multicenter study.

Laryngoscope

. 2017; 127(1):223-228. EBM level 4.........................155-160

Summary

: This article is a multicenter retrospective review of a cohort of pediatric and adult

patients who underwent cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness of a variety of

etiologies. Pre- and postoperative testing was performed using both word and sentence testing

in quiet in the implanted ear alone, and sentence recognition in noise in the binaural condition.

Word and sentence scores for the implanted ear alone improved significantly by 3 months

postoperatively, while speech recognition in noise in the binaural condition did not change

significantly. The majority of patients reported reduction in tinnitus in the implanted ear.

Zeitler DM, Dorman MF, Natale SJ, et al. Sound source localization and speech understanding

in complex listening environments by single-sided deaf listeners after cochlear implantation.

Otol Neurotol

. 2015; 36(9):1467-1471. EBM level 2.......................................................161-165

Summary

: This article investigates sound localization ability and speech comprehension in

complex noise environments in patients who had unilateral cochlear implantation for single-

sided deafness (SSD) as compared to three control groups: normal hearing (NH) young adults,

NH older adults, and bilateral cochlear implant (BCI) users. All SSD-CI users showed poorer-

than-normal sound localization, typically performing as well as BCI subjects, with some

subjects localizing close to the 95

th

percentile of NH listeners. Speech understanding was

significantly improved in ambient noise with signal presented to the CI ear in the SSD-CI

listeners.

IV.

Temporal Bone/Skull Base

A.

Temporal bone and skull base lesions

McRackan TR, Wilkinson EP, Brackmann DE, Slattery WH. Stereotactic radiosurgery for

facial nerve schwannomas: meta-analysis and clinical review.

Otol Neurotol

. 2015; 36(3):

393-398. EBM level 3........................................................................................................166-171

Summary

: In this thorough meta-analysis, 10 studies are included comprising 45 patients with at

least a 2-year follow up. Of these patients, 93% had tumor control, 67% had stable facial nerve

function, 21% had improved function, and 13% had worsened facial nerve function. Hearing

results are not as favorable. The authors conclude that stereotactic radiosurgery is an effective

and reasonable option for treating facial schwannomas, though hearing loss is a substantial risk.