Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Laryngorhinootologie 2022; 101(S 01): S36-S78
DOI: 10.1055/a-1731-9321
Referat

Cochlea-Implantation: Konzept, Therapieergebnisse und Lebensqualität

Article in several languages: deutsch | English
T. Lenarz
1   Hals-Nasen-Ohrenklinik der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover
,
A. Büchner
1   Hals-Nasen-Ohrenklinik der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover
,
A. Illg
1   Hals-Nasen-Ohrenklinik der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Cochlea-Implantate stellen heute eine unverzichtbare Methode zur auditiven Rehabilitation hochgradig hörgeschädigter Patienten dar. Durch die rasante Entwicklung der Implantat-technologie haben sich die Hörergebnisse erheblich verbessert, ca 80% der Patienten können telefonieren und Kinder erreichen eine nahezu normale Hör- und Sprachentwicklung. Das hat zu einer Indikationsausweitung hin zu Patienten mit Hochtontaubheit und einseitiger Taubheit geführt. Zur Zeit sind aber nur etwa 60 000 der ca 1 Million CI-Kandidaten implantiert. Zukünftig werden multimodale universelle Hörimplantate für die kombinierte elektro-mechanische Stimulation zur Verfügung stehen, die fortlaufend eine Anpassung der Stimulationsstrategie an den jeweiligen Funktionszustand von Haarzellen und Hörnerven auch bei progredienter Schwerhörigkeit ermöglichen. Brain-Computer-Interfaces erlauben die automatisierte Anpassung an die Hörsituation und eine Optimierung der Signalverarbeitung zur Erzielung eines bestmöglichen Hörvermögens. Binaurale Hörsysteme erlauben eine Verbesserung von Richtungshören und Hören im Störgeräusch. Advanced Implants besitzen additiv gefertigte individualisierte Elektroden, die sich nach atraumatischer robotisch assistierter Insertion aktiv der Anatomie der Cochlea anpassen. Sie sind in Abhängigkeit von der Pathophysiologie mit integrierten biologischen Komponenten ausgestattet, unterstützen die Erhaltung des Restgehörs und ermöglichen die Regeneration neuraler Elemente zur Verbesserung der Elektroden-Nerven-Schnittstelle. Dadurch lassen sich die heutigen grundsätzlichen Grenzen der CI-Technologie überwinden und in Richtung des physiologischen Gehörs verschieben. Das Bionische Ohr ist somit in Reichweite. Durch konsequente Weiterentwicklung mit Vereinfachung der Versorgung, hörerhaltender Implantation unter Lokal-Anästhesie und Anwendung robotischer Systeme werden zukünftig mehr Patienten von dem neuen physiologischen Hören profitieren.

Schlüsselwörter

Cochlea-Implantation heute - Technologie - Indikationen und Diagnostik - Chirurgie - Anpassung und Training - Nachsorge - Ergebnisse - Hörergebnisse - Sprachentwicklung - Erziehung - Bildung und Beruf - Weitere Ergebnisse - Komplikationen und Implantatausfälle - Lebensqualität - Zukünftige Entwicklungen


Publication History

Article published online:
23 May 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literaturverzeichnis

  • 1 Lenarz T. Cochlear Implant – State of the Art. Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie 2017; 96: S123-S151
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie. S2k-Leitlinie „Cochlea-Implantat-Versorgung“, 2020. AWMF-Register-Nr. 017/071
    PubMed

    • Kapitel Technologie

    • 3 Büchner A, Gärtner L. Technische Entwicklungen bei Cochlea-Implantaten. Stand der Technik. HNO 2017; 65: 276-289
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 4 O´Leary SO, Briggs R, Gerard JM, Iseli C, Wei BPC, Tari S, Rousset A, Bester C. Intraoperative observational real-time electrocochleography as a predictor of hearing loss after cochlear implantation: 3 and 12 month outcomes. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41: 1222-1229
      PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 5 Lenarz T, Büchner A, Gantz B, Hansen M, Tejani VD, Labadie R, O´Connell B, Buchman CA, Valenzuela CV, Adunka OF, Harris MS, Riggs WJ, Fitzpatrick D, Koka K. Relationship between intraoperative electrocochleography and hearing preservation. Otol Neurotol 2022; 43: e72-e78
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 6 Wesarg T, Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Laszig R, Beck R, Jung L, Zirn S. Intra- und postoperative elektrophysiologische Diagnostik. HNO 2017; 65: 308-320
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 7 Gärtner L, Klötzer K, Lenarz T, Scheper V. Correlation of electrically evoked compound action potential amplitude growth function slope and anamnestic parameters in cochlear implant patients – identification of predictors for the neuronal health status. Life 2021; 11: 203
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 8 Helmstädter V, Lenarz T, Erfurt P, Kral A, Baumhoff P. The summating potential is a reliable marker of electrode position in electroccochleography: Cochlear Implant as a theragnostic probe. Ear Hear 2018; 39: 687-700
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 9 Zwicker E, Leysieffer H, Dinter K. Ein Implantat zur Reizung des Nervus acusticus mit zwölf Kanälen. Laryng Rhino Otol 1986; 65: 109-113
      Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 10 Büchner et al. Clinical evaluation of cochlear implant sound coding taking into account conjectural masking functions, MP3000. Cochlear Implants Int 2011; 12: 194-204
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
    • 11 Durisin M, Büchner A, Lesinski-Schiedat A. et al. Cochlear implantation in children with bacterial meningitic deafness: the influence of the degree of ossification and obliterationon impedance and charge of the implant. Cochlear Implants Int 2015; 16: 147-158
      CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar

      • Kapitel Diagnostik und Indikation

      • 12 Grimm G, Herzke T, Berg D, Hohmann V. The Master Hearing Aid: A PC-based platform for algorithm development and evaluation. Acta acustica 2006; 92: 618-628
        PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 13 Lin FR, Yaffe K, Jin X. et al. Hearing loss and cognitive decline in older adults. Jama Intern Med 2013; 173: 293-299
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 14 Haumann S. et al. Indication criteria for cochlear implants and hearing aids: impact of audiological and non-audiological findings. Audiol Res 2012; 2: e12
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 15 Santarelli R, Rossi R, Scimemi P. et al. OPA1-related auditory neuropathy: site of lesion and outcome of cochlear implantation. Brain. 2015; 138: 563-576
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 16 Würfel W, Lanfermann H, Lenarz T, Majdani M. et al. Cochlear length determination using Cone Beam Computed Tomography in a clinical setting. Hear Res 2014; 316: 65-72
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 17 Keilmannn A. et al. 2012 Funktionelle Kernspintomographie (fMRT) in der Hördiagnostik. 29. Wiss. Jahrestagung Dt. Gesellschaft Phoniatrie Pädaudiologie. GMS Publishing House 2012 Doc12dgppV2
        PubMed
      • 18 Saliba J, Bortfeld H, Levitin DJ, Oghalai JS. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy for neuroimaging in cochlear implant recipients. Hear Res 2016; 338: 64-75
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 19 Burke W, Lenarz T, Maier H. Hereditäre Schwerhörigkeit. HNO 2013; 61: 352-363
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 20 Burke W, Lenarz T, Maier H. Hereditäre Schwerhörigkeit. Syndrome. HNO 2014; 62: 759-769
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 21 Schmidt HA, Pich A, Prnezler K. et al. Personalized proteomics for precision diagnostics in hearing loss: disease-specific analysis of human perilymph by mass spectrometry. ACS Omega 2021; 13: 21241-21254
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 22 Buchman CA, Gifford RH, Haynes DS, Lenarz T. et al. Unilateral cochlear implants for severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss: a systematic review and consensus statements. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020; 146: 942-953
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 23 Büchner A, Illg A, Majdani O, Lenarz T. Investigation of the effect of cochlear implant electrode length on speech comprehension in quiet and noise compared with the results with users of electro-acoustic-stimulation, a retrospective analysis. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0174900
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 24 Schurzig D, Timm ME, Batsoulis C. et al. A novel method for clinical cochlear duct length estimation toward patient-specific cochlear implant selection. Oto open 2018; 2 2473974×18800238
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 25 Timm ME, Majdani O, Weller T. et al. Patient specific selection of lateral wall cochlear implant electrodes based on anatomical indication ranges. PLos One 2018; 13: e0206435
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 26 von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J. et al. Electro-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. New technology for severe hearing loss. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1999; 61: 334-340
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 27 Gantz BJ, Turner CW. Combining acoustic and electric hearing. Laryngoscope 2003; 113: 1726-1730
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 28 Lenarz T, James C, Cuda D. et al. European multi-center study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant. Int J Audiol 2013; 52: 838-848
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 29 Jurawitz MC, Büchner A, Harpel T, Schüssler M, Majdani O, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T. Hearing preservation outcomes with different cochlear implant electrodes. Audiol Neurotol 2014; 19: 293-309
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 30 Suhling MC, Majdani O, Salcher R, Leifholz M, Büchner A, Lesiinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T. The impact of electrode array length on hearing preservation in cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2016; 37: 1006-1016
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 31 Avci E, Nauwelaers T, Lenarz T, Hamacher V, Kral A. Variations in microanatomy oft he human cochlea. J Comp Neurol 2014; 522: 3245-3261
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 32 Lenarz T, Büchner A, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Timm M, Salcher R. Hearing preservation with a new atraumatic lateral wall electrode. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41: e993-e1003
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
      • 33 Lenarz T, Timm ME, Salcher R, Büchner A. Individual hearing preservation cochlear implantation using the concept of partial insertion. Otol Neurotol 2019; 40: e326-e335
        CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar

        • Kapitel Implantation

        • 34 Lenarz T. Cochlear Implantation. The Hannover Guideline. Tuttlingen: Endo Press,; 2006
          Search in Google Scholar
        • 35 Kronenberg J, Migirov L, Dagan T. Suprameatal approach: new surgical approach for cochlear implantation. J Laryngol Otol 2001; 115: 283-285
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 36 Henslee AM, Kaufmann CR, Andrick MD. et al. Development and characterization of an electrocochleography-guided robotics-assisted cochlear implant array insertion system. Otol Head Neck Surg 2021;
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 37 Daoudi H, Lahlou G, Torres R. et al. Robot-assisted cochlear implant electrode array insertion in adults: a comparative study with manual insertion. Otol Neurotol 2021; 42: e438-e444
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 38 Majdani O, Rau TS, Baron S. et al. A robot-guided minimally invasive approach for cochlear implant surgery. Int Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery 2009; 4: 475-486
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 39 Choudhury B, Fitzpatrick DC, Buchman CA. et al. Intra-operative round window recordings to acoustic stimuli from cochlear implant patients. Otol Neurotol 2012; 33: 1507-1515
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 40 Radeloff A, Shehata-Dieler W, Scherzed A. et al. Intraoperative monitoring using cochlear microphonics in cochlear implant patients with residual hearing. Otol Neurotol 2012; 33: 348-354
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 41 O´Leary SO, Briggs R, Gerard JM, Iseli C, Wei BPC, Tari S, Rousset A, Bester C. Intraoperative observational real-time electrocochleography as a predictor of hearing loss after cochlear implantation: 3 and 12 month outcomes. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41: 1222-1229
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 42 Suntinger K, Huber A, Röösli C. et al. Implications of phase change in extracochlear electrocochleoraphic recordings during cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2021;
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 43 Dietz A, Lenarz T. Cochlear Implantation under local anesthesia in 117 cases: patients´ subjective experience and outcome. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; 278: 1-7
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 44 Connors JR, Deep NL, Huncke TK, Roland JT. Cochlear Implantation under local anesthesia with conscious sedation in the elderly: first 100 cases. Laryngoscope 2021; 131: e946-e951
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 45 Kontorinis G, Lenarz T, Stöver S, Paasche G. Impact of insertion speed of cochlear implant electrodes on the insertion forces. Otol Neurotol 2011; 32: 565-570
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 46 Zuniga MG, Hügl S, Engst BG, Lenarz T, Rau T. The effect of ultra-slow velocities on insertion forces: a study using highly flexible straight electrode array. Otol Neurotol 2021; 42: e1013-e1021
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 47 Labadie RF, Balachandran R, Noble JH. et al. Minimally invasive image-guided cochlear implantation surgery: First report of clinical implementation. Laryngoscope 2014; 124: 1915-1922
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 48 Caversaccio M, Gavaghan K, Wimmer W. et al. Robotic cochlear implantation: surgical procedure and first clinical experience. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 2017; 137: 447-454
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 49 Rau T, Zuniga G, Salcher R, Lenarz T. A simple tool to automate the insertion process in cochlear implant surgery. In J Computer Ass Radiol Surg 2020; 15: 1931-1939
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 50 Hellingman CA, Dunnebier EA. Cochlear implantation in patients with acute and chronic middle ear infectious disease: A review of the literature. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2008; 266: 171-176
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 51 Issing PR, Schönermark MP, Kempf HG, Ernst A, Lenarz T. Cochlear implantation in patients with chronic otitis: indications for subtotal petrosectomy and obliteration of the middle ear. Skull Base Surgery 1998; 8: 127-131
          Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 52 Free RH, Falcioni M, Di Trapani G. et al. (2013) The role of subtotal petrosectomy in cochlear implant surgery – a report of 32 cases and review of indications. Otol Neurotol 2013; 34: 1033-1040
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 53 Sennaroglu L. Saatci A new classification for cochleovestibular malformations. Laryngoscope 2003; 112: 2230-2241
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 54 Sennaroglu L. Cochlear implantation in inner ear malformations – a review article. Cochlear Implants International 2010; 11: 4-41
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 55 Weber B, Lenarz T, Dahm M. et al. Cochlear implantation in children with malformation of the cochlea. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 1995; 50: 59-65
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 56 Lenarz T, Lim H, Joseph G. et al. Zentral-auditorische Implantate. HNO 2009; 57: 551-562
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 57 Farhood Z, Nguyen SA, Miller SC. et al. Cochlear implantation in inner ear malformations: systemic review of speech perception outcomes and intraoperative findings. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017; 156: 783-793
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 58 Fenov L, Warnecke A, Salcher R. et al. Cochlear implantation in otosclerosis: functional, technical, radiological and surgical aspects. Laryngo-Rhino-Otol 2020; 99 So2: S257-S258
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 59 Lenarz T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Weber BP. et al. The Nucleus double array cochlear implant: a new concept for the obliterated cochlea. Otol Neurotol 2001; 22: 24-32
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 60 Pires JS, Melo AS, Caiado R. et al. Facial nerve stimulation after cochlear implantation: our experience in 448 adult patients. Cochlear implants international 2018; 19
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 61 Battmer R, Pesch J, Stöver S. et al. Elimination of facial nerve stimlation by reimplantation in cochlear implant subjects. Otol Neurotol 2006; 27: 918-922
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 62 Gärtner L, Lenarz T, Ivanauskaite J, Büchner A. Facial nerve stimulation in cochlear implant users – a matter of stimulus parameters?. Cochlear implants Int 2022; 23
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 63 Plontke SK, Caye-Thomasen P, Strauss C. et al. Management transmodiolärer und transmakulärer Vestibularis und Cochlearisschwannome mit und ohne Cochleaimplantation. HNO 2020; 68: 734-748
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 64 Lenarz T, Lim H, Joseph G. et al. 2009; Zentral-auditorische Implantate. HNO 57: 551-562
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 65 Heman-Ackah SE, Roland JT, Haynes DS, Waltzmann SB. Pediatric cochlear implantation: candidacy evaluation, medical and surgical considerations, an expanding criteria. Otolaryngologic Clinics 2012; 45: 41-67
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 66 Loundon N, Blanchard M, Roger G. et al. Medical and surgical complications in pediatric cochlear implantation. Arch Otolaryngology, Head Neck Surg 2010; 136: 12-15
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 67 Stolle SR, Groß S, Lenarz T, Lesinski-Schiedat A. Postoperative Früh- und Spätkomplikationen bei Kindern und Erwachsenen mit Cochlea-Implantat. Laryngo-Rhino-Otol 2014; 93: 605-611
          Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 68 Reis R, Boisvert I, Looi V. et al. Speech recognition outcomes after cochlear reimplantation surgery. Trends Hear 2017; 21
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 69 Wang JT, Wang AY, Psamos C, DaCruz M. Rates of revision and device failure in cochlear implant surgery: A 30 year experience. Laryngoscope 2014; 124: 2393-2399
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 70 Hwang CF, Ko HC, Tsou TY. et al. Comparisons of auditory performance and speech intelligibility after cochlear reimplantation in mandarin-speaking users. Biomed Res Int. 2016; Article ID 8962180
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 71 Roßberg W, Timm M, Matin F. et al. First results of electrode reimplantation and its hypothetical dependence from artificial brain maturation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; 278: 951-958
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 72 European consensus statement on cochlear implant failures and explantations. Otol Neurotol 2005; 26: 1097-1099
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 73 Gärtner L, Büchner A, Illg A, Lenarz T. Hidden electrode failure in a cochlear implant user. Laryngoscope 2021; 131: e1275-e1278
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 74 Battmer RD, Linz B, Lenarz T. A review of device failure in more than 23 years of clinical experience of a cochlear implant program with more than 3400 implantees. Otol Neurotol 2009; 30: 455-463
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 75 Battmer RD, O’Donoghue G, Lenarz T. A multicenter study of device failure in European cochlear implant centers. Ear Hear 2007; 28: 95S-99S
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 76 Battmer RD, Backous D, Balkany T. et al. International classification of reliability for implanted cochlear implant receiver stimulators. Otol Neurotol 2010; 31: 1190-1193
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 77 Kempf HG, Johann K, Lenarz T. Complications in pediatric cochlear implant surgery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 1999; 256: 128-132
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 78 Miyamoto R, Young M, Myres WA. et al. Complications of pediatric cochlear implantation. Eur Arch ORL 1996; 253: 1-4
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 79 Cohen NL, Hoffman AA. Complications of cochlear implant surgery in adults and children. New England Journal Med 2003; 249: 435-445
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 80 Thom JJ, Carlson ML, Olson MD, Neff BA, Beatty CW, Facer GW, Driscoll CLW. The prevalence and clinical course of facial nerve paresis following cochlear implant surgery. Laryngoscope 2013; 123: 1000-1004
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 81 Matin F, Krüger C, Avallone E. et al. Influence of the electrode array design on incidence of vertigo symptoms and vestibular function after cochlear implantation. Ear Nose Throat J 2021; 28
          PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 82 Cunningham CD, Slattery WH, Luxford WM. Postoperative infection in cochlear implant patients. Otolaryngology Head Neck Surg 2004; 131: 109-114
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 83 Kanaan N, Winkel A, Stumpp N, Stiesch M, Lenarz T. Bacterial growth on cochlear implants as a potential origin of complications. Otol Neurotol 2013; 34: 539-543
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
        • 84 O’Donoghue G, Balkany T, Cohen N, Lenarz T. et al. Meningitis and cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol 2002; 23: 823-824
          CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar

          • Kapitel Anpassung und Hörsprachtraining

          • 85 Hoppe U, Liebscher T, Hornung J. Anpassung von Cochleaimplantsystemen. HNO 2017; 65: 546-551
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 86 Finke M, Billinger M, Büchner A. Toward automated cochlear implant fitting procedures based on even-related potentials. Ear Hearing 2017; 38: e118-e127
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 87 Vaerenberg B, Smits C, De Ceulaer G. et al. Cochlear implant programming: A global survey on the state of the art. The Scientific World Journal 2014;
            PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 88 Bauernfeind G, Wriessnegger S, Haumann S, Lenarz T. Cortical activation patterns to spatially presented pure tone stimuli with different intensities measured by functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Hum Brain Mapp 2018; 39: 2710-2724
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 89 Nogueira W, Cosatti G, Schierholz I. et al. Toward decoding selective attention from single-trial EEG data in cochlear implant users. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2020; 67: 38-49
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 90 Illg A. Rehabilitation bei Kindern und Erwachsenen. HNO 2017; 65: 552-560
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 91 Illg A. Hörtraining und Hörerziehung. In: Leonhardt A, Kaul T. Grundbegriffe der Hörgeschädigtenpädagogik. Ein Handbuch. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer; 2021
            Search in Google Scholar
          • 92 Battmer RD, Borel S, Brendel M, Büchner A. et al. Assessment of fitting to outcomes expert FOX with new cochlear implant users in a multi-centre study. Cochlear Implants international 2015; 16: 100-109
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 93 Cullington H, Kitterick P, Weal M, Margol-Gromada M. Feasibility of personalized remote long-term follow-up of people with cochlear implants: a randomized controlled trial. BMJ open 2018; 8: e019640
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 94 Luryi A, Tower JI, Preston J, Burkland A, Trueheart CE, Hildrew DM. Cochlear implant mapping through telemedicine a feasibility study. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41: e330-e333
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 95 Zeh R, Baumann U. Stationäre Rehabilitationsmaßnahme bei erwachsenen CI-Trägern. HNO 2015; 63: 557-576
            CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
          • 96 Archbold S, Lutman ME, Marshall DH. Categories of Auditory Performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995; Suppl 166: 312-314
            PubMedSearch in Google Scholar

            • Kapitel Ergebnisse

            • 97 Holden LK, Finley CC, Firszt J. et al. Factors affecting open-set word recognition in adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 2013; 34: 342-360
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 98 Cusumano C, Friedman DR, Fang Y. et al. Performance plateau inprelingually and postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant recipients. Otol Neurotol 2017; 38: 334-338
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 99 Krüger B, Joseph G, Rost U. et. al. Performance groups in adult cochlear implant users: speech perception results from 1984 until today. Otol Neurotol 2008; 29: 509-512
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 100 Ramekers D, Versnel H, Grolman W. Auditory-nerve responses to varied inter-phase gap and phase duration of the electric pulse stimulus as predictors for neuronal degeneration. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2014; 15: 187-202
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 101 Lin FR, Chin WW. et al. Cochlear implantation in older adults. Medicine 2012; 91: 229-241
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 102 Loughry DG, Kelly ME, Kelley GA. et al. Association of age-related hearing loss with cognitive function, cognitive impairment, and dementia. A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018; 144: 115-126
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 103 Huber M, Roesch S, Pletzer B, Lukaschyk J, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Illg A. Can Cochlear Implantation in Older Adults Reverse Cognitive Decline Due to Hearing Loss? Ear & Hearing. 2021 May 11. von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J et al. Electro-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. New technology for severe hearing loss. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1999; 61: 334-340
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 104 Brown CA, Bacon SP. Low-frequency speech cues and simulated electric-acoustic hearing. J. Acoustic. Soc. Am. 2009; 125: 1658-1665
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 105 Ching TYC, Incerti P, Hill M. Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear & Hearing 2004; 25: 9-21
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 106 Chang JE, Bai JY, Zeng FG. Unintelligible low-frequency sound enhances simulated cochlear-implant speech recognition in noise. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2006; 53: 2598-2601
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 107 Sheffield BJ, Zeng FG. The relative phonetic contributions of a cochlear implant and residual acustic hearing to bimodal speech perception. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2012; 131: 518-530
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 108 Büchner A, Schüssler M, Battmer RD, Stöver T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T. Impact of Low-Frequency Hearing. Audiology Neurotol 2009; 14: 8-13
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 109 Dorman MF, Spahr T, Gifford F, Loiselle L, McKarns S, Holden T, Skinner M, Finley C. An electric frequency-to-place map for a cochlear implant patient with hearing in the nonimplanted ear. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2007; 8: 234-240
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 110 Illg A, Bojanowicz M, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T, Büchner A. Evaluation of the Bimodal Benefit in a Large Cohort of Cochlear Implant Subjects Using a Contralateral Hearing Aid. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35: e240-e244
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 111 Tropitzsch A, Schade-Mann T, Gamerdinger P. et al. Diagnostic yield of targeted hearing loss gene panel sequencing in a large german cohort with a balanced age distribution from a single diagnostic center: an eight-year study. Ear Hear 2021;
              PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 112 Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Laszig R. et al. Comparison of pseudobinaural hearing to real binaural hearing rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus. Otol Neurotol 2011; 32: 39-47
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 113 Büchner A, Brendel M, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Wenzel G, Frohne-Büchner C, Jaeger B, Lenarz T. Cochlear implantation in unilateral deaf subjects associated with ipsilateral tinnitus. Otol Neurotol 2010; 31: 1381-1385
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 114 Hansen MR, Gantz BJ, Dunn C. Outcomes following cochlear implantation for patients with single-sided deafness, including those with recalcitrant Ménière’s disease. Otol. Neurotol 2013; 34
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 115 Gordon K, Henkin Y, Kral A. Asymmetric Hearing During Development: The Aural Preference Syndrome and Treatment Options. Pediatrics 2015; 136: 141-153
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 116 Mertens G, De Bodt M, Van de Heyning P. Cochlear implantation as a long-term treatment for ipsilateral incapacitating tinnitus in subjects with unilateral hearing loss up to 10 years. Hear. Res 2016; 331: 1-6
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 117 Finke M, Strauß-Schier A, Kludt E, Büchner A, Illg A. Speech intelligibility and subjective benefit in single-side deaf adults after cochlear implantation. Hearing Research 2017; 348: 112-119
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 118 Laske RD, Röösli C, Pfiffner F, Veraguth D, Huber AM. Functional results and subjective benefit of a transcutaneous bone conduction device in patients with single-sided deafness. Otol. Neurotol. 2015; 36: 1151e1156
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 119 Lesinski-Schiedat A, Illg A, Warnecke A, Heermann R, Bertram B, Lenarz T. Kochleaimplantation bei Kindern im 1. Lebensjahr. Vorläufige Ergebnisse. HNO 2006; 54: 565-572
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 120 Kral A, Kronenberger WG, Pisoni DB, O´Donoghue G. Neurocognitive factors in sensory restoration of early deafness: a connectome model. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15: 610-621
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 121 Wanna GB, Gifford RH, McRackan TR. et al. Bilateral cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2012; 45: 81-89
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 122 Schulze-Gattermann H, Illg A, Schönermark M. et al. Cost-benefit analysis of pediatric cochlear imlantation: German experience. Otol Neurotol 2002; 23: 674-681
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 123 Illg A, Haack M, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Büchner A, Lenarz T. Long-Term Outcomes, Education, and Occupational Level in Cochlear Implant Recipients Who Were Implanted in Childhood. Ear Hear 2017; 38: 577-587
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 124 Lenarz T, Reuter G, Buser K, Altenhofen L. Modellprogramm Verbesserung der Früherfassung von Hörstörungen im Kindesalter. Wissenschaftliche Reihe des Zentralinstituts für die Kassenärztliche Vereinigung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 2007
              Search in Google Scholar
            • 125 Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Neugeborenen-Hörscreening. 2008
              PubMed
            • 126 Illg A, Giourgas A, Kral A, Büchner A, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T. Speech comprehension in children and adolescents after sequential bilateral cochlear implantation with long interimplant interval. Otol. Neurotol. 2013; 34: 682e689
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 127 Nelson PB, Jin SH, Carney AE, Nelson DA. Understanding speech in modulated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2003; 113: 961-968
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 128 Pasanisi E, Bacciu A, Vincenti V, Guida M, Berghenti MT, Barbot A, Panu F, Bacciu S. Comparison of speech perception benefits with SPEAK and ACE coding strategies in pediatric Nucleus cochlear implant24M cochlear implant recipients. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology 2002; 64: 159-163
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 129 Stickney GFG, Litovsky RY, Assman P. Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2004; 116: 1081-1091
              CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
            • 130 Kollmeier B. Versorgung und Rehabilitation mit Hörgeräten. 1997. Georg Thieme Verlag; Stuttgart-New York:
              Search in Google Scholar
            • 131 Illg A, Sandner C, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Kral A, Lesinski-Schiedat A. The Optimal Inter-Implant Interval in Pediatric Sequential Bilateral Implantation. Hearing Research. 2017 pii: S0378-5955(17)30274-5.
              PubMedSearch in Google Scholar

              • Kapitel Lebensqualität

              • 132 International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health © World Health Organization 2001
                PubMed
              • 133 Holch P, Absolom K, Brooke C, Wang X. (2020). Advances in Patient Reported Outcomes: Integration and Innovation. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes 2020; 4: 28
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 134 Mercieca-Bebber R, King MT, Calvert MJ, Stockler MR, Friedlander M. (2018). The importance of patient-reported outcomesin clinical trials and strategies for future optimization. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 2018; 9: 353-367
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 135 Bansal D, Bhagat A, Schifano F, Gudala K. (2015). Role of patient-reported outcomes and other efficacy endpoints in the drug approval process in Europe (2008-2012). J Epidemiol Glob Health 2015; 5: 385-395
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 136 Rivera SC, Kyte DG, Aiyegbusi OL, Slade AL, McMullan C, Calvert MJ. The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2019; 17: 156
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 137 Rudolph C, Petersen GS, Pritzkuleit R, Storm H, Katalinic A. The acceptance and applicability of a patient-reported experience measurement tool in oncological care: a descriptive feasibility study in northern Germany. BMC Health Services Research 2019; 19: 786
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 138 Squitieri L, Bozic KJ, Pusic AL. The Role of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Value-Based Payment Reform. Value Health 2017; 20: 834-836
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 139 Ambert-Dahan E, Laouénan C, Lebredonchel M, Borel S, Carillo C, Bouccara D, Mosnier I. (2018). Evaluation of the impact of hearing loss in adults: Validation of a quality of life questionnaire. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 2018; 135: 25-31
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 140 Gatehouse S, Noble W. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 2004; 43: 85-99
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 141 Hinderink JB, Krabbe PF, Van Den Broek P. Development and application of a health-related quality-of-life instrument for adults with cochlear implants: the Nijmegen cochlear implant questionnaire. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000; 123: 756-765
                PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 142 Kompis M, Pfiffner F, Krebs M, Caversaccio MD. (2011). Factors influencing the decision for Baha in unilateral deafness: the Bern benefit in single-sided deafness questionnaire. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 71: 103-111
                PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 143 Newman CW, Jacobson GP, Spitzer JB. Development of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head NeckSurg 1996; 122: 143-148
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 144 Noble W, Jensen NS, Naylor G, Bhullar N, Akeroyd MA. A short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale suitable for clinical use: the SSQ12. Int J Audiol 2013; 52: 409-412
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 145 Umansky AM, Jeffe DB, Lieu JE. The HEAR-QL: quality of life questionnaire for children with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2011; 22: 644-653
                Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 146 Hinderink JB, Krabbe PF, Van Den Broek P. Development and application of a health-related quality-of-life instrument for adults with cochlear implants: the Nijmegen cochlear implant questionnaire. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000; 123: 756-765
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 147 Gatehouse S, Noble W. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 2004; 43: 85-99 Retrieved from
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 148 Noble W, Jensen NS, Naylor G, Bhullar N, Akeroyd MA. A short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale suitable for clinical use: the SSQ12. Int J Audiol 2013; 52: 409-412
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 149 Amann E, Anderson I. Development and validation of a questionnaire for hearing implant users to self-assess their auditory abilities in everyday communication situations: the Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (HISQUI19). Acta Otolaryngol 2014; 134: 915-923
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 150 Aiello CP, de L, Ferrari DV. Validity and reliability of the hearing handicap inventory for adults. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 77: 432-438
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 151 Cox RM, Alexander GC. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 176-186 Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7789669
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 152 Gatehouse S. (1999). Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile: Derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing aid services. Journal of the American academy of audiology 1999; 10: 80-103
                Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 153 Cox RM, Alexander GC. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA): psychometric properties of the English version. Int J Audiol 2002; 41: 30-35 Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12467367
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 154 Claes AJ, Mertens G, Gilles A. et al. The repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status for hearing impaired individuals (RBANS-H) before and after cochlear implantation: A protocol for a prospective, longitudinal cohort study. Front Neurosci 2016; 10: 512
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 155 Lenarz T, Muller L, Czerniejewska-Wolska H. et al. Patient-related benefits for adults with cochlear implantation: A multicultural longitudinal observational study. Audiol Neurootol 2017; 22: 61-73
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 156 Knopke S, Olze H. Hearing rehabilitation with cochlear implants and cognitive abilities. HNO. 2018; 66: 364-368
                PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 157 Sladen DP, Peterson A, Schmitt M. et al. Health-related quality of life outcomes following adult cochlear implantation: A prospective cohort study. Cochlear Implants Int 2017; 18: 130-135
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 158 Olze H, Szczepek AJ, Haupt H. et al. Cochlear implantation has a positive influence on quality of life, tinnitus, and psychological comorbidity. Laryngoscope. 2011; 121: 2220-2227
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 159 Djalilian HR, King TA, Smith SL, Levine SC. Cochlear implantation in the elderly: results and quality-of-life assessment. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2002; 111: 890-895
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 160 Aimoni C, Ciorba A, Hatzopoulos S. et al. Cochlear implants in subjects over age 65: Quality of life and audiological outcomes. Med Sci Monit 2016; 22: 3035-3042
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 161 Mosnier I, Vanier A, Bonnard D. et al. Long-term cognitive prognosis of profoundly deaf older adults after hearing rehabilitation using cochlear implants. J Am Geriatr Soc 2018; 66: 1553-1561
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 162 Ravens-Sieberer U, Bullinger M. Assessing health related quality of life in chronically ill children with the German KINDL: first psychometric and content-analytical results. Quality of Life Research 1998; 7: 399-407
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 163 Morettin M, Jaquelinie Dias dos Santos M, Rosolen Stefanini M, de Lourdes Antonio F, Bevilacqua MC, Alves Cardoso MR. Measures of quality of life in children with cochlear implant: systematic review. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2013; 79: 382-390
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 164 Gustke Matthias. et al. ‘Die Fragebögen Disabkids Und Kidscreen – Vergleich Der Änderungssensitivität Bei Der Erfassung Gesundheitsbezogener Lebensqualität von Kindern Und Jugendlichen’ 2011; 51-59
                PubMed
              • 165 Haukedal CL, Lyxell B, Wie OB. Health-Releated Quality of Life with Cochlear Implants: The Children`s Perspective. Ear & hearing 2020; 41: 330-343
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 166 Gesis (2012). ALLBUS 2012 ALLBUS. Die Allgemeine Bevölkerungsumfrage in den Sozialwissenschaften http://www.gesis.org/allbus/
                PubMed
              • 167 Archbold S, Lutman ME, Marshall DH. Categories of Auditory Performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995; Suppl 166: 312-314
                PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 168 Giourgas A, Illg A, Kludt E, Lenarz T. Und wenn es nicht klappt? – Non-User nach Cochlea-Implantation. 22. CI-Kongress 4.-5.12. 2020. Hannover:
                Search in Google Scholar
              • 169 Salehomoum M. Cochlear Implant Nonuse: Insight from Deaf Adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 2020; 270-282
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 170 Benchetrit L, Ronner EA, Anne S, Cohen MS. Cochlear Implantation in Children with Single-Sided Deafness. A systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2021; 147: 58-69
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
              • 171 Valero MR, Sadadcharam M, Henderson L, Freeman SR, Lloyd S, Kevin M, Green KM, Bruce IT. Compliance with cochlearimplantation in children subsequently diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Cochlear Implants Int 2016; 17: 200-206
                CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar