Cochlear implantation in patients with autoimmune inner ear disease including cogan syndrome: A comparison with age‐ and sex‐matched controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with autoimmune inner ear disease (AIED) who have undergone cochlear implantation (CI) and compare post-CI performance in AIED to matched controls. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case control study. METHODS: Study cohort was comprised of 25 adult implantees (AIED [n = 18], Cogan syndrome [n = 7]). The AIED group was defined by rapidly progressive bilateral sensorineural hearing loss leading to unusable hearing within weeks to months. Patients with Cogan syndrome, the archetypal inner ear autoimmune disease, were also examined and used for within-cohort comparison. Clinical and operative records were reviewed. Post-CI performance was assessed using open-set sentence tests. Age- and sex-matched individuals deafened by other postlingual causes were used as controls. RESULTS: Of 25 patients, 24 had uneventful, full electrode insertions. One AIED patient had partial insertion due to cochlear ossification and did not achieve open-set speech perception post-CI. Mean open-set sentence scores for study patients with uneventful insertions were 92.8%, 97.3%, and 96.4% at 6 months, 1 year, and ≥ 2 years, respectively. Compared to matched controls, patients deafened by autoimmune causes had significantly higher post-CI performance at all postoperative test intervals (P < .05). There was no significant difference in postimplantation performance between Cogan syndrome and AIED patients. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this was the largest study of cochlear implantation in AIED and Cogan syndrome patients. In our experience, both groups generally attained high levels of post-CI speech perception and performed above average. Cochlear ossification affecting implantation in Cogan syndrome patients was not observed in our series, contrary to some reports.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".