论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨大前庭水管综合征患儿人工耳蜗植入术后阈值、舒适阈和电极阻抗的特点,为这类患儿进行人工耳蜗植入术的可行性提供依据。方法:将131例语前聋患儿,根据CT检查结果分为A和B两组,A组111例,内耳结构正常;B组20例,双侧前庭导水管扩大,但不伴有其他内耳结构异常。所有患儿均使用澳大利亚Cochlear公司生产的Nucleus24M型人工耳蜗。术后4周左右安装体外设备并进行心理物理测试,使用与患儿年龄相应的方法进行阈值和舒适阈的测试;使用R116和R126软件自动测试电极阻抗。结果:经独立样本t检验,两组各电极的阈值和舒适阈的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);两组心理物理测试值即阈值和舒适阈,在开机时和开机后1、2、3周,2、3、6、9个月及1年的差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。两组各电极阻抗之间的差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05);两组电极阻抗在开机时和开机后1、2、3周,2、3、6、9个月及1年的差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论:大前庭水管综合征患儿与内耳结构正常患儿人工耳蜗植入术后的差异无统计学意义,为大前庭水管综合征患儿制定术后调试计划及设置各电刺激参数时,均可采用与内耳结构正常患儿相同的方法。
Objective: To investigate the characteristics of threshold, comfort threshold and electrode impedance after cochlear implantation in children with grand vestibular aqueduct syndrome, and to provide evidence for the feasibility of cochlear implantation in children with grand vestibular aqueduct syndrome. Methods: One hundred and thirteen children with prelingual deafness were classified into A and B groups according to the results of CT examination. 111 cases in group A had normal inner ear structure. Group B had 20 cases with enlarged bilateral vestibular aqueduct but no other inner ear Abnormal structure. All children were using Nucleus 24M cochlear implant available from Cochlear, Australia. After 4 weeks or so, an external device is installed and subjected to psychophysical tests. Thresholds and comfort thresholds are tested using methods appropriate to the age of the child. The electrode impedance is automatically tested using the R116 and R126 software. Results: There was no significant difference between the thresholds and comfort thresholds of the two groups of electrodes (all P> 0.05) by independent sample t test. The two groups of psychophysical test values were threshold and comfort threshold. , 2,3 weeks, 2,3,6,9 months and 1 year difference was not statistically significant (all P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between the impedance of the two groups (all P> 0.05). The impedance of the two groups was significantly higher at the start-up and at 1, 2, 3 weeks, 2, 3, 6, 9 months and 1 year The difference was not statistically significant (all P> 0.05). CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference in cochlear implantation between children with grand vestibular aqueduct syndrome and children with normal inner ear structure. When setting up the post-operative debugging plan and setting the parameters of electrical stimulation for children with grand vestibular aqueduct syndrome, The same method can be used for children with normal inner ear structure.