Wideband Tympanometry in Adults with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss with and without Cochlear Implants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives—Cochlear implantation has been suggested to be associated with an air-bone gap, possibly secondary to increased middle- and inner-ear stiffness. To explore the effect of possible changes in mechanics due to cochlear implantation, we measured wideband tympanometry (WBT) in individuals with normal hearing and individuals with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss who underwent unilateral or bilateral cochlear implantation. Our goal was to characterize differences in WBT patterns associated with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss and with cochlear implantation. Design—The study participants were 24 individuals with normal hearing (48 ears) and 17 with cochlear implants, of which 15 were unilaterally implanted and two were implanted bilaterally. All the participants had normal otoscopy. In the implanted group, inner-ear anatomy was normal according to preoperative imaging. All participants underwent pure-tone audiometric assessment, standard tympanometry (226 Hz probe tone), and WBT to a click stimulus (analyzed from 226 to 8000 Hz). WBT was recorded at ambient and peak pressures. To elucidate the effect of sensorineural hearing loss on WBT, we compared normal-hearing ears with impaired non-implanted ears. The impact of cochlear implantation was assessed by comparing the WBT of the implanted and non-implanted ears of the same participants. Moreover, the effect of the ear (right vs. left) and test–retest reproducibility were evaluated. Results—WBT results for right and left ears showed no statistically significant differences in the normal hearing participants. There were no statistical differences shown between repeated measurements of WBT with removal and re-insertion of the probe in any of the groups—the normal ears, the implanted ears, and the non-implanted ears with hearing impairment. Peak compensated admittance (Ytm) in standard tympanometry was normal in 32 out of 34 (94%) ears with sensorineural hearing loss, with one CI user having bilateral negative middle-ear pressure. Compared to normal-hearing ears, ears with severe to profound SNHL, with or without cochlear implantation, showed a significant decrease in absorbance at high frequencies (4000–5000 Hz). Implanted ears, compared both to normal-hearing and contralateral-non-implanted ears, showed a significant decrease in absorbance at low frequencies (400–800 Hz) and an increase in absorbance around 1600 Hz. Conclusions—WBT analysis revealed that the implanted ears showed a significant decrease in absorbance at low frequencies (400–800 Hz) and an increase at 1600 Hz. This finding is likely a result of an increased stiffness due to the implantation surgery and the presence of the implant in the inner ear. In contrast, the specific decrease in absorbance around 4000–5000 Hz in the implanted and non-implanted ears compared to the normal ears is likely either due to aging or the impact of the severe-to-profound SNHL on the input impedance of the cochlea. The structural and functional changes of both the conductive system and the cochlea associated with aging and SNHL may change the wideband acoustic immittance of the ear and these alterations might be correlated with the hearing loss severity. Additional research is needed to determine how much hearing loss and age influence wideband acoustic immittance of the ear.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».