0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Article |

Correlation of Cochlear Nerve Size and Auditory Performance After Cochlear Implantation in Postlingually Deaf Patients FREE

Bo Gyung Kim, MD; Hyo Jin Chung, MD; Jeong Jin Park, MD; Sera Park, MD; Sung Huhn Kim, MD, PhD; Jae Young Choi, MD, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.


JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;139(6):604-609. doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2013.3195.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance Cochlear implantation (CI) yields outstanding results in postlingual deafness, but outcomes of auditory performance after CI are variable. Thus far, it has been difficult to accurately predict patient prognoses after CI.

Objective To assess whether cochlear nerve (CN) size as measured with parasagittal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is correlated with auditory performance after CI in postlingually deaf patients.

Design Retrospective study. All MRI results were reviewed by the same observer, who was blinded to the participants' information.

Setting A university tertiary care center.

Participants All 102 postlingually deaf adults who underwent CI during the period August 2010 through June 2012 were eligible to participate. Thirty-four patients were excluded because MRI was not performed or was not of sufficient quality for assessment. Sixty-eight postlingually deaf adults (mean [range] age, 49 [16-77] years) were enrolled.

Exposure Cochlear implantation.

Main Outcomes and Measures Size of the CN and auditory performance.

Results The mean (SD) cross-sectional area (CSA) of the CN was 0.922 (0.229) mm2 and tended to decrease with age; however, there was no significant correlation between the size of the CN and age. The cause of deafness also did not affect the size of the CSA. However, CSA was negatively associated with both the duration of deafness (P < .001) and degree of hearing loss (P = .008 for the difference in CSA between ears with no more than 80-dB hearing loss [n = 25] and ears with at least 101-dB hearing loss [n = 65]). Interestingly, CSA was positively correlated with auditory performance after CI (P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance We suggest that measuring the size of the CN with parasagittal MRI can yield information that is helpful in preoperative counseling of patients.

Figures in this Article

Cochlear implantation (CI) is an effective modality for habilitation and has improved interventions for patients with sensorineural hearing loss. In particular, CI yields outstanding results in postlingual deafness.1 However, outcomes of auditory performance after CI are variable. One known factor leading to this variability is believed to involve spiral ganglion cell survival and cochlear nerve (CN) function,2 but it is difficult to accurately predict patient prognoses after CI by assessing the spiral ganglion and CN.

The development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has enabled the production of high-resolution images. Parasagittal MRI is used to rule out CN deficiency. Studies were recently performed on the correlation between the CN and hearing loss and the correlation between the CN and age by measuring the size of the CN with MRI. Sildiroglu et al3 reported that 3-dimensional (3D) Fourier transformation constructive interference at steady-state (CISS) sequences yielded superior results in CN imaging and that acquired sensorineural hearing loss might not present with significant changes in CN size on MRI. In contrast, Russo et al4 reported that the size of the CN was mildly hypoplastic in children with profound sensorineural hearing loss. Kang et al5 suggested that the CN was unaffected by age in 3.0-T CISS imaging normalized to the facial nerve. Performance after CI is determined by various factors, including the degeneration of spiral ganglion cells and the CN. Therefore, the size of the CN may be a prognostic factor in CI outcome. However, whether the size of the CN on the basis of MRI is related to CI outcome is unknown.

The present study was conducted to assess the relationship between the size of the CN as determined by means of parasagittal MRI and multiple parameters in postlingually deaf patients and to determine whether the size of the CN is related to auditory performance after CI.

PARTICIPANTS

During the period August 2010 through June 2012, 102 postlingually deaf adult patients with sensorineural hearing loss underwent CI at our institute. Thirty-four patients were excluded because MRI was not performed or was not of sufficient quality for assessment. Sixty-eight postlingually deaf adults (30 men and 38 women) with sensorineural hearing loss were enrolled. The mean (SD) age at the time of CI was 48.4 (16.5) years, and the mean (SD) duration of deafness was 22.8 (16.2) years. The inclusion criteria were onset of deafness after 4 years of age and implantation after 16 years of age. Hearing loss was evaluated on the basis of the mean pure tone audiogram result at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. The cause of deafness was investigated by means of medical record reviews, patient interviews, and blood sampling for genetic origin. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, in Seoul, South Korea.

MRI PROTOCOL AND MEASUREMENT OF CN SIZE

The MRI scans were performed on a 3.0-T or 1.5-T MRI system (Intera Achieva; Philips Medical Systems) using a 6-channel sensitivity-encoding head coil. All images were evaluated with a parasagittal 3D–driven equilibrium sequence perpendicular to the internal auditory canal (IAC). The targeted parasagittal scan perpendicular to the long axis of the IAC was obtained with a T2-weighted 3D turbo spin-echo sequence with a driven equilibrium radio frequency reset pulse following routine MRI sequences with spin-echo T1-weighted and T2-weighted images. The imaging parameters for the 3D-driven equilibrium sequence were as follows: repetition time/echo time = 1500/200 milliseconds; 256 acquisition/256 reconstruction; 15-cm field of view; 1.5-mm section thickness; 0.75-mm overlap; number of acquisitions = 2; and acquisition time less than 5 minutes.

All MRI results were reviewed by the same observer, who was blinded to the participants' information for consistency. The diameter of the CN was measured on the parasagittal image of the middle of the IAC using an automatic window-level setting. The parasagittal image through the IAC was selected as the middle of the IAC because the CN, facial nerve, and vestibular nerves could be optimally visualized (Figure 1). The vertical and horizontal diameters of the CN in the middle of the IAC were measured on the parasagittal images and used to calculate the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the CN: [π(vertical diameter/2)(horizontal diameter/2)]. Measurements were obtained on parasagittal images using 0.01-mm electronic calipers provided with the Picture Archiving Communication System (Centricity; GE Healthcare).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Measurement of cross-sectional area of the cochlear nerve. A, Parasagittal images acquired from axial images (dotted line, cut line of 3-dimensional–driven equilibrium sequence; solid line, middle of the measured internal auditory canal). B, Parasagittal images of the internal auditory canal. The vertical and horizontal diameters were measured with calipers.

EVALUATION OF AUDITORY PERFORMANCE

Evaluations of auditory performance were performed preoperatively and 3 months after CI. Sentence perception tests under auditory-only (AO) listening conditions without visual cues were performed using samples of words or sentences from everyday life in a noiseless sound-field environment. Auditory performance was assessed using a conventional test, the Korean version of the Central Institute for the Deaf test.6,7 The test was scored as the percentage of words repeated correctly. We used the postoperative AO sentence test scores as comparable indices.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

For statistical analysis, we used Microsoft Excel (Microsoft) and Origin software (OriginLab). Changes in CSA according to age, duration of deafness, and speech perception after CI were evaluated using simple linear regression analysis. Differences between groups were evaluated using 1-way analysis of variance. The Pearson correlation was used to assess the correlation between the CSA and each parameter. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

CN SIZE ACCORDING TO AGE

We examined the correlation between the size of the CN and the patient's age. The mean (SD) CN CSA was 0.922 (0.229) mm2. Figure 2A shows a scatterplot of the CSA of the CN vs age. Linear regression analysis revealed a slightly negative correlation between CN size and age that was not statistically significant (P = .10). Thus, although the size of the CN may decrease with age, there is no significant correlation between CN size and age.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Scatterplots. A, Correlation between age and the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the cochlear nerve. Linear regression analysis showed a negative correlation between age and the CSA (slope = −0.00199). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.143; P = .10. B, Correlation between the duration of deafness and the CSA of the cochlear nerve. Linear regression analysis showed a negative correlation between the duration of deafness and CSA (slope, −0.00724). Pearson correlation coefficient, −0.511; P < .001.

CN SIZE ACCORDING TO THE DURATION OF DEAFNESS

The duration of deafness ranged from 2 months to 61 years (median, 20 years). Figure 2B shows a scatterplot of the CSA vs the duration of deafness. Linear regression analysis showed a significant negative correlation between the CSA of the CN and the duration of deafness (P < .001).

There might be interpersonal differences in CN size that are not related to the duration of deafness. Therefore, we also investigated the interaural difference in CN size of patients who have a gap of at least 9 years in the duration of deafness between the 2 ears. Figure 3 shows the CSA in both ears. In all 5 patients, the CSA of the ear with the longer period of deafness was smaller than that of the ear with the shorter period of deafness. Figure 4 shows parasagittal images of patient 2, who had been deaf in the right ear for 1 year and in the left ear for 10 years. The CN was smaller in the left ear with the longer duration of deafness.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 3. Cross-sectional areas of the cochlear nerves in 5 patients who had different durations of deafness in each ear. The numbers in parentheses indicate the duration of deafness in years.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 4. Parasagittal images showing the internal auditory canals in the ears that had been deaf for 1 year (cross-sectional area [CSA], 1.173 mm2) (A) and 10 years (CSA, 0.769 mm2) (B). The arrows indicate the cochlear nerves.

CN SIZE ACCORDING TO HEARING LEVEL AND CAUSE OF DEAFNESS

We evaluated whether the size of the CN is related to hearing loss level or the cause of deafness. The patients' ears were divided into 5 hearing loss groups: 70 or less, 71 to 80, 81 to 90, 91 to 100, and at least 101 dB (n = 7, 18, 22, 24, and 65, respectively). The CSA did not differ significantly among the 5 groups (P = .07) (Figure 5A). Although not statistically significant, the CSA of the CN tended to decrease according to the level of hearing loss. The CSAs of the 80 or less dB (n = 25) and the at least 101 dB (n = 65) groups differed significantly (P = .008).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 5. Cross-sectional area of the cochlear nerve. The number above each box represents the number of ears in the sample. The box indicates SD; inside the box, the horizontal line indicates the median and the small rectangle indicates the mean; X indicates 1% and 99% of the range. A, Patients with sensorineural hearing loss. The patients' ears were divided into 5 groups according to the level of hearing loss. B, Patients with deafness due to various causes. S-SNHL, sudden sensorineural hearing loss; COM, chronic otitis media.

The causes of deafness were classified as unknown, sudden sensorineural hearing loss, chronic otitis media, genetic origin, and other (n = 77, 29, 10, 18, and 2, respectively). The distribution of the causes of deafness is shown in Figure 5B. None of these causes of deafness had any significant differences in CSA (P = .86).

CORRELATION BETWEEN CN SIZE AND AUDITORY PERFORMANCE AFTER CI

We examined the correlation between CN size and auditory performance before CI. Figure 6A shows a scatterplot of the CSA vs pre-CI AO sentence test scores. Linear regression analysis revealed a weak correlation between the CSA and AO sentence test scores that was not statistically significant (P = .15). We also examined the correlation between CN size and the difference in AO (post-CI minus pre-CI) sentence test scores, and linear regression analysis revealed a weak correlation (Figure 6B) (P = .19). We examined the association between CN size and auditory performance after CI. Figure 6C shows a scatterplot of the CSA vs post-CI AO sentence test scores. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between the CSA and AO sentence test scores (P = .04).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 6. Correlation between auditory-only (AO) sentence test scores and cross-sectional area (CSA). A, Pre–cochlear implantation (CI) test scores (slope, 0.00162). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.155; P = .15. B, (Post-CI –Pre-CI) test scores (slope, 0.00096). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.142; P = .19. C, Post-CI test scores (slope, 0.00131). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.216; P = .04.

CN SIZE ACCORDING TO AGE AND DURATION OF DEAFNESS

Aging and hearing loss can lead to histological changes in the auditory system.8 In a mouse model of deafness, these histological changes manifest mainly in the organ of Corti or cochlear nucleus.9 Recent work in mice has shown a slow (months to years) loss of spiral ganglion cells and degeneration of the CN after noise exposure, even when there is no loss of hair cells.10 Deafness can also lead to changes in the CN. According to a human temporal bone study, the maximum diameters of the CN, vestibular nerves, and eighth cranial nerves were significantly smaller in the deaf population compared with normal-hearing controls.11 Recently, several studies attempted to show a correlation between the CN and hearing loss by means of high-resolution temporal bone computed tomography. These studies demonstrated that the length and width of the bony CN canal as measured by means of temporal bone computed tomography were significantly smaller in ears with congenital hearing loss.12,13

There have been attempts to analyze CN size with MRI in various groups of patients with hearing loss. Sildiroglu et al3 measured CN size using 3D Fourier transformation CISS sequence images and found no significant changes in groups with acquired mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. In contrast, Russo et al4 reported that the size of the CN was hypoplastic in children with profound congenital sensorineural hearing loss compared with normal controls. Herman and Angeli14 also suggested that parasagittal MRI could be used to measure the CN and that there was a significant difference in CSA between postlingually deafened and normal-hearing adults.

We found that as the duration of deafness and level of hearing loss became more severe, the CSA of the CN decreased. That is, hearing loss can cause gradual degenerative changes in the CN, so the CN may be preserved at least for a time before it degenerates. Patient age did not significantly correlate with CN size in our study. Hinojosa and Nelson15 performed a human temporal bone study and showed that the number of spiral ganglion cells was related not only to age but also to hearing loss. Likewise, Kang et al5 reported that the CN was unaffected by age in normal-hearing ears.

AUDITORY PERFORMANCE AND CN SIZE

The factors affecting auditory performance after CI in postlingually deaf patients are variable. It has been suggested that the duration of deafness, age at implantation, duration of implant treatment, and etiology might affect performance.16 In a cadaveric human temporal bone study of patients who had undergone CI, residual hearing was correlated with both the number of spiral ganglion cells and auditory performance after CI.17 It was demonstrated that the diameters of the CN, vestibular nerves, and eighth cranial nerves were strongly correlated with the total spiral ganglion cell count.18 Therefore, the size of the CN is presumed to be associated with auditory performance after CI. The correlation of the CN with auditory performance after CI was mentioned in patients with congenital inner ear anomalies.19 In addition, it was previously reported that children with hypoplasia or aplasia of the CN showed poor auditory performance after CI.20,21

We found that the size of the CN was correlated with post-CI AO sentence test scores. However, there was only a weak correlation between the AO (post-CI minus pre-CI) sentence test scores and the size of the CN, which was not statistically significant. We think that such a result stemmed from the weak tendency of the correlation between pre-CI AO sentence test scores and the size of the CN. The weak pre-CI correlation was augmented by CI, so that the post-CI AO sentence test score and the size of the CN were significantly correlated. Therefore, we found that the size of the CN measured with MRI was positively correlated with auditory performance after CI, and it may have potential value as a prognostic factor for the CI outcome.

In conclusion, to our knowledge, we are the first to report that the size of the CN as measured with MRI is correlated with performance after CI in postlingually deaf patients. Our present results suggest that MRI can be used to predict residual hearing and auditory performance after CI in patients with postlingual deafness. Because the hearing loss of the patients resulted from multiple causes, additional investigations are needed to analyze the correlation of the CN size with auditory performance in more homogeneous patient groups. However, our study suggests that measuring the size of the CN with parasagittal MRI may provide useful information for preoperative counseling of patients.

Correspondence: Jae Young Choi, MD, PhD, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea (jychoi@yuhs.ac).

Submitted for Publication: November 2, 2012; final revision received February 16, 2013; accepted February 27, 2013.

Author Contributions: All authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: B. G. Kim and Choi. Acquisition of data: B. G. Kim, Chung, and J. J. Park. Analysis and interpretation of data: B. G. Kim, S. Park, S. H. Kim, and Choi. Drafting of the manuscript: B. G. Kim and Choi. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Chung, J. J. Park, S. Park, S. H. Kim, and Choi. Statistical analysis: B. G. Kim, S. Park, and S. H. Kim. Obtained funding: Choi. Administrative, technical, and material support: B. G. Kim. Study supervision: Choi.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Funding/Support: This study was supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the South Korean government (MEST) (No. 2011-0028066).

Ahmad FI, Demason CE, Teagle HF, Henderson L, Adunka OF, Buchman CA. Cochlear implantation in children with postlingual hearing loss.  Laryngoscope. 2012;122(8):1852-1857
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cosetti MK, Waltzman SB. Outcomes in cochlear implantation: variables affecting performance in adults and children.  Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2012;45(1):155-171
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sildiroglu O, Cincik H, Sonmez G,  et al.  Evaluation of cochlear nerve size by magnetic resonance imaging in elderly patients with sensorineural hearing loss.  Radiol Med. 2010;115(3):483-487
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Russo EE, Manolidis S, Morriss MC. Cochlear nerve size evaluation in children with sensorineural hearing loss by high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging.  Am J Otolaryngol. 2006;27(3):166-172
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kang WS, Hyun SM, Lim HK, Shim BS, Cho JH, Lee KS. Normative diameters and effects of aging on the cochlear and facial nerves in normal-hearing Korean ears using 3.0-tesla magnetic resonance imaging.  Laryngoscope. 2012;122(5):1109-1114
PubMed   |  Link to Article
 Park HY. K-CID [in Korean]. Presented at: Seventh Dong-A Hearing Symposium; November 6, 2010; Busan, Korea; 65-71
Giolas TG, Duff JR. Equivalency of CID and revised CID sentence lists.  J Speech Hear Res. 1973;16(4):549-555
PubMed
Makary CA, Shin J, Kujawa SG, Liberman MC, Merchant SN. Age-related primary cochlear neuronal degeneration in human temporal bones.  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2011;12(6):711-717
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Feng J, Bendiske J, Morest DK. Degeneration in the ventral cochlear nucleus after severe noise damage in mice.  J Neurosci Res. 2012;90(4):831-841
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kujawa SG, Liberman MC. Adding insult to injury: cochlear nerve degeneration after “temporary” noise-induced hearing loss.  J Neurosci. 2009;29(45):14077-14085
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Nadol JB Jr, Xu WZ. Diameter of the cochlear nerve in deaf humans: implications for cochlear implantation.  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1992;101(12):988-993
PubMed
Teissier N, Van Den Abbeele T, Sebag G, Elmaleh-Berges M. Computed tomography measurements of the normal and the pathologic cochlea in children.  Pediatr Radiol. 2010;40(3):275-283
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fatterpekar GM, Mukherji SK, Alley J, Lin Y, Castillo M. Hypoplasia of the bony canal for the cochlear nerve in patients with congenital sensorineural hearing loss: initial observations.  Radiology. 2000;215(1):243-246
PubMed
Herman B, Angeli S. Differences in cochlear nerve cross-sectional area between normal hearing and postlingually deafened patients on MRI.  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011;144(1):64-66
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hinojosa R, Nelson EG. Cochlear nucleus neuron analysis in individuals with presbycusis.  Laryngoscope. 2011;121(12):2641-2648
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Blamey P, Arndt P, Bergeron F,  et al.  Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants.  Audiol Neurootol. 1996;1(5):293-306
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Incesulu A, Nadol JB Jr. Correlation of acoustic threshold measures and spiral ganglion cell survival in severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss: implications for cochlear implantation.  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1998;107(11, pt 1):906-911
PubMed
Nadol JB Jr. Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: implications for cochlear implantation.  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117(3, pt 1):220-228
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Buchman CA, Teagle HF, Roush PA,  et al.  Cochlear implantation in children with labyrinthine anomalies and cochlear nerve deficiency: implications for auditory brainstem implantation.  Laryngoscope. 2011;121(9):1979-1988
PubMed
Valero J, Blaser S, Papsin BC, James AL, Gordon KA. Electrophysiologic and behavioral outcomes of cochlear implantation in children with auditory nerve hypoplasia.  Ear Hear. 2012;33(1):3-18
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kutz JW Jr, Lee KH, Isaacson B, Booth TN, Sweeney MH, Roland PS. Cochlear implantation in children with cochlear nerve absence or deficiency.  Otol Neurotol. 2011;32(6):956-961
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Measurement of cross-sectional area of the cochlear nerve. A, Parasagittal images acquired from axial images (dotted line, cut line of 3-dimensional–driven equilibrium sequence; solid line, middle of the measured internal auditory canal). B, Parasagittal images of the internal auditory canal. The vertical and horizontal diameters were measured with calipers.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Scatterplots. A, Correlation between age and the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the cochlear nerve. Linear regression analysis showed a negative correlation between age and the CSA (slope = −0.00199). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.143; P = .10. B, Correlation between the duration of deafness and the CSA of the cochlear nerve. Linear regression analysis showed a negative correlation between the duration of deafness and CSA (slope, −0.00724). Pearson correlation coefficient, −0.511; P < .001.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 3. Cross-sectional areas of the cochlear nerves in 5 patients who had different durations of deafness in each ear. The numbers in parentheses indicate the duration of deafness in years.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 4. Parasagittal images showing the internal auditory canals in the ears that had been deaf for 1 year (cross-sectional area [CSA], 1.173 mm2) (A) and 10 years (CSA, 0.769 mm2) (B). The arrows indicate the cochlear nerves.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 5. Cross-sectional area of the cochlear nerve. The number above each box represents the number of ears in the sample. The box indicates SD; inside the box, the horizontal line indicates the median and the small rectangle indicates the mean; X indicates 1% and 99% of the range. A, Patients with sensorineural hearing loss. The patients' ears were divided into 5 groups according to the level of hearing loss. B, Patients with deafness due to various causes. S-SNHL, sudden sensorineural hearing loss; COM, chronic otitis media.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 6. Correlation between auditory-only (AO) sentence test scores and cross-sectional area (CSA). A, Pre–cochlear implantation (CI) test scores (slope, 0.00162). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.155; P = .15. B, (Post-CI –Pre-CI) test scores (slope, 0.00096). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.142; P = .19. C, Post-CI test scores (slope, 0.00131). Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.216; P = .04.

Tables

References

Ahmad FI, Demason CE, Teagle HF, Henderson L, Adunka OF, Buchman CA. Cochlear implantation in children with postlingual hearing loss.  Laryngoscope. 2012;122(8):1852-1857
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Cosetti MK, Waltzman SB. Outcomes in cochlear implantation: variables affecting performance in adults and children.  Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2012;45(1):155-171
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Sildiroglu O, Cincik H, Sonmez G,  et al.  Evaluation of cochlear nerve size by magnetic resonance imaging in elderly patients with sensorineural hearing loss.  Radiol Med. 2010;115(3):483-487
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Russo EE, Manolidis S, Morriss MC. Cochlear nerve size evaluation in children with sensorineural hearing loss by high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging.  Am J Otolaryngol. 2006;27(3):166-172
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kang WS, Hyun SM, Lim HK, Shim BS, Cho JH, Lee KS. Normative diameters and effects of aging on the cochlear and facial nerves in normal-hearing Korean ears using 3.0-tesla magnetic resonance imaging.  Laryngoscope. 2012;122(5):1109-1114
PubMed   |  Link to Article
 Park HY. K-CID [in Korean]. Presented at: Seventh Dong-A Hearing Symposium; November 6, 2010; Busan, Korea; 65-71
Giolas TG, Duff JR. Equivalency of CID and revised CID sentence lists.  J Speech Hear Res. 1973;16(4):549-555
PubMed
Makary CA, Shin J, Kujawa SG, Liberman MC, Merchant SN. Age-related primary cochlear neuronal degeneration in human temporal bones.  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2011;12(6):711-717
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Feng J, Bendiske J, Morest DK. Degeneration in the ventral cochlear nucleus after severe noise damage in mice.  J Neurosci Res. 2012;90(4):831-841
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kujawa SG, Liberman MC. Adding insult to injury: cochlear nerve degeneration after “temporary” noise-induced hearing loss.  J Neurosci. 2009;29(45):14077-14085
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Nadol JB Jr, Xu WZ. Diameter of the cochlear nerve in deaf humans: implications for cochlear implantation.  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1992;101(12):988-993
PubMed
Teissier N, Van Den Abbeele T, Sebag G, Elmaleh-Berges M. Computed tomography measurements of the normal and the pathologic cochlea in children.  Pediatr Radiol. 2010;40(3):275-283
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Fatterpekar GM, Mukherji SK, Alley J, Lin Y, Castillo M. Hypoplasia of the bony canal for the cochlear nerve in patients with congenital sensorineural hearing loss: initial observations.  Radiology. 2000;215(1):243-246
PubMed
Herman B, Angeli S. Differences in cochlear nerve cross-sectional area between normal hearing and postlingually deafened patients on MRI.  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011;144(1):64-66
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Hinojosa R, Nelson EG. Cochlear nucleus neuron analysis in individuals with presbycusis.  Laryngoscope. 2011;121(12):2641-2648
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Blamey P, Arndt P, Bergeron F,  et al.  Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants.  Audiol Neurootol. 1996;1(5):293-306
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Incesulu A, Nadol JB Jr. Correlation of acoustic threshold measures and spiral ganglion cell survival in severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss: implications for cochlear implantation.  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1998;107(11, pt 1):906-911
PubMed
Nadol JB Jr. Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: implications for cochlear implantation.  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117(3, pt 1):220-228
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Buchman CA, Teagle HF, Roush PA,  et al.  Cochlear implantation in children with labyrinthine anomalies and cochlear nerve deficiency: implications for auditory brainstem implantation.  Laryngoscope. 2011;121(9):1979-1988
PubMed
Valero J, Blaser S, Papsin BC, James AL, Gordon KA. Electrophysiologic and behavioral outcomes of cochlear implantation in children with auditory nerve hypoplasia.  Ear Hear. 2012;33(1):3-18
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Kutz JW Jr, Lee KH, Isaacson B, Booth TN, Sweeney MH, Roland PS. Cochlear implantation in children with cochlear nerve absence or deficiency.  Otol Neurotol. 2011;32(6):956-961
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections