82 / 224
796
3.
Un rango de guías de electrodos para implante coclear
flexibles y delgados han demostrado conservar audición
residual dentro de niveles proporcionales con EEA en la
mayoría de los receptores. La guía
Cochlear Slim-Straight,
de acuerdo a su uso en los dispositivos CI422 y CI522,
entrega un buen rendimiento de conservación auditiva y a
su vez proporciona altos niveles de rendimiento solo por el
implante coclear incluso si la audición residual se pierde.
4.
Estudios clínicos han mostrado sistemáticamente una
combinación sinérgica de información de frecuencia media-
alta entregada de manera eléctrica por un implante coclear
con frecuencias bajas entregados acústicamente, propor-
cionando un rendimiento superior a aquello obtenido solo
por un implante coclear. La mejora observada de reconoci-
miento del habla solo por el implante coclear por frecuen-
cias bajas acústicas ha demostrado ser efectivo cuando es
entregado al lado ipsilateral o contralateral del implante.
5.
Los nuevos procesadores de sonido externos integrados,
tal como la serie Cochlear CP900, tienen la capacidad de
entregar señales acústicas y eléctricas desde un solo dispo-
sitivo, proporcionando mayor conveniencia para el usuario y
un mejor proceso de ajuste integrado.
Herbert Mauch es empleado de Cochlear Latinoamérica y Paul Boyd es asesor para Cochlear Europe.
REFERENCIAS BIBLIOGRáFICAS
1. Ching TY, Dillon H, Byrne D. Speech recognition of hearing-
impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited
role of high-frequency amplification. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998.
103(2), 1128-40.
2. Hogan CA, Turner CW. High-frequency audibility: benefits for
hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998. 104(1),
432-41.
3. Vickers DA, Moore BC, Baer T. Effects of low-pass filtering
on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and
without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am.
2001. 110(2), 1164-75.
4. Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Spahr AJ, McKarns SA. Effect of
digital frequency compression (DFC) on speech recognition
in candidates for combined electric and acoustic stimulation
(EAS). J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007. 50(5), 1194–1202.
5. Hopkins K, Khanom M, Dickinson AM, Munro KJ. Benefit from
non-linear frequency compression hearing aids in a clinical
setting: the effects of duration of experience and severity
of high-frequency hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2014. 53(4),
219-28.
6. Heng J, Cantarero G, Elhilali M, Limb CJ. Impaired perception
of temporal fine structure and musical timbre in cochlear
implant users. Hear Res. 2011. 280(1-2), 192-200.
7. Moon IJ, Hong SH. What is temporal fine structure and why is
it important? Korean J Audiol. 2014. 18(1), 1-7.
8. NICE Technology Appraisal Guidance 166 (2009). Cochlear
implants for children and adults with severe to profound
deafness. National Health Service National Institute for
Health and Clinical Excellence.
9. von Ilberg CA, Baumann U, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Adunka OF,
Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: a review
of the first decade. Audiol Neurootol. (2011), 16(Suppl 2),
1-30.
10. Ching TY, Incerti P, Hill M. Binaural benefits for adults who use
hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear Hear.
(2004), 25(1), 9-21.
11. Dorman MF, Gifford RH. Combining acoustic and electric
stimulation in the service of speech recognition. Int J Audiol.
(2010), 49(12), 912-9.
12. Gantz BJ, Dunn C, Oleson J, Hansen M, Parkinson A, Turner C.
Multicenter clinical trial of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 cochlear
implant: Final outcomes. Laryngoscope. (2016), 126(4),
962-73.
13. Dedhia K, Worman T, Meredith MA, Rubinstein JT. Patterns
of long-term hearing loss in hearing preservation cochlear
implant surgery. Otol Neurotol. (2016), 37(5), 478-86.
14. Carlson ML, Archibald DJ, Gifford RH, Driscoll CL, Beatty
CW. Re-implantation with a conventional length electrode
following residual hearing loss in four hybrid implant
recipients. Cochlear Implants Int, (2012), 13(3), 148–155.
15. Briggs R, Tycocinski M, Xu J, Risi F, Svehla M et al. Comparison
of round window and cochleostomy approaches with a
prototype hearing preservation electrode. Audiol Neurotol
(2006), 11 (Suppl 1), 42-48.
16. Lenarz T, James C, Cuda D, Fitzgerald O’Connor A, Frachet B,
et al. European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24
cochlear implant. Int J Audiol. (2013), 52(12):838-48.
17. von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Pfennigdorff T, Hartmann R,
Stuerzebecher E, Klinke R. Electric-acoustic stimulation of the
auditory system: new technology for severe hearing loss. ORL J
Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec (1999), 61, 334–340.
18. Helbig S, Baumann U: Acceptance and fitting of the DUET
device: a combined speech processor for electric-acoustic
stimulation; in van de Heyning P, Kleine Punte A (eds):
Cochlear Implants and Hearing Preservation. Adv Otolaryngol.
(2010), 67, 81–87.
[REV. MED. CLIN. CONDES - 2016; 27(6) 787-797]