Evaluating calcium channel blockers and bisphosphonates as otoprotective agents in cochlear implantation hearing preservation candidates.

IF 1.4 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY

COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-13 DOI:10.1080/14670100.2024.2338003

Kristen L Yancey, Ankita Patro, Miriam Smetak, Elizabeth L Perkins, Brandon Isaacson, Marc L Bennett, Matthew O'Malley, David S Haynes, Jacob B Hunter

{"title":"Evaluating calcium channel blockers and bisphosphonates as otoprotective agents in cochlear implantation hearing preservation candidates.","authors":"Kristen L Yancey, Ankita Patro, Miriam Smetak, Elizabeth L Perkins, Brandon Isaacson, Marc L Bennett, Matthew O'Malley, David S Haynes, Jacob B Hunter","doi":"10.1080/14670100.2024.2338003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Evaluate potential effects of calcium channel blockers (CCB) and bisphosphonates (BP) on residual hearing following cochlear implantation.Methods: Medications of 303 adult hearing preservation (HP) candidates (low frequency pure tone average [LFPTA] of 125, 250, and 500 Hz ≤80 dB HL) were reviewed. Postimplantation LFPTA of patients taking CCBs and BPs were compared to controls matched by age and preimplantation LFPTA.Results: Twenty-six HP candidates were taking a CCB (N = 14) or bisphosphonate (N = 12) at implantation. Median follow-up was 1.37 years (range 0.22-4.64y). Among subjects with initial HP, 29% (N = 2 of 7) CCB users compared to 50% (N = 2 of 4) controls subsequently lost residual hearing 3-6 months later (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.04-4.32, p = 0.58). None of the four BP patients with initial HP experienced delayed loss compared to 50% (N = 2 of 4) controls with initial HP (OR = 0.00, 95% CI = 0.00-1.95, P = 0.43). Two CCB and one BP patients improved to a LFPTA <80 dB HL following initial unaided thresholds that suggested loss of residual hearing.Discussion: There were no significant differences in the odds of delayed loss of residual hearing with CCBs or BPs.Conclusion: Further investigation into potential otoprotective adjuvants for maintaining residual hearing following initial successful hearing preservation is warranted, with larger cohorts and additional CCB/BP agents.","PeriodicalId":53553,"journal":{"name":"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL","volume":" ","pages":"131-139"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14670100.2024.2338003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Evaluate potential effects of calcium channel blockers (CCB) and bisphosphonates (BP) on residual hearing following cochlear implantation.

Methods: Medications of 303 adult hearing preservation (HP) candidates (low frequency pure tone average [LFPTA] of 125, 250, and 500 Hz ≤80 dB HL) were reviewed. Postimplantation LFPTA of patients taking CCBs and BPs were compared to controls matched by age and preimplantation LFPTA.

Results: Twenty-six HP candidates were taking a CCB (N = 14) or bisphosphonate (N = 12) at implantation. Median follow-up was 1.37 years (range 0.22-4.64y). Among subjects with initial HP, 29% (N = 2 of 7) CCB users compared to 50% (N = 2 of 4) controls subsequently lost residual hearing 3-6 months later (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.04-4.32, p = 0.58). None of the four BP patients with initial HP experienced delayed loss compared to 50% (N = 2 of 4) controls with initial HP (OR = 0.00, 95% CI = 0.00-1.95, P = 0.43). Two CCB and one BP patients improved to a LFPTA <80 dB HL following initial unaided thresholds that suggested loss of residual hearing.

Discussion: There were no significant differences in the odds of delayed loss of residual hearing with CCBs or BPs.

Conclusion: Further investigation into potential otoprotective adjuvants for maintaining residual hearing following initial successful hearing preservation is warranted, with larger cohorts and additional CCB/BP agents.

查看原文本刊更多论文

将钙通道阻滞剂和双膦酸盐作为耳蜗植入术听力保护候选者的耳保护剂进行评估。

目的评估钙通道阻滞剂（CCB）和双磷酸盐（BP）对人工耳蜗植入术后残余听力的潜在影响：方法：对 303 名成人听力保护（HP）候选人（低频纯音平均值 [LFPTA] 为 125、250 和 500 Hz ≤80 dB HL）的用药情况进行审查。将服用氯羟胆碱和氯羟胆碱的患者植入后的 LFPTA 与年龄和植入前 LFPTA 匹配的对照组进行了比较：26 例 HP 候选者在植入时服用了 CCB（14 例）或双磷酸盐（12 例）。中位随访时间为1.37年（范围为0.22-4.64年）。在最初有听力障碍的受试者中，29%的CCB使用者（7人中有2人）与50%的对照者（4人中有2人）相比，在3-6个月后丧失了残余听力（OR = 0.40，95% CI = 0.04-4.32，p = 0.58）。与 50%（4 人中有 2 人）初始听力损失为 HP 的对照组相比，4 名初始听力损失为 HP 的 BP 患者均未出现听力延迟损失（OR = 0.00，95% CI = 0.00-1.95，P = 0.43）。两名 CCB 患者和一名 BP 患者的病情有所改善，可以进行 LFPTA 讨论：结论：使用CCB或BP，延迟丧失残余听力的几率没有明显差异：结论：有必要进一步研究潜在的耳保护辅助药物，以便在初次成功保护听力后维持残余听力，同时扩大研究队列并使用更多的 CCB/BP 药物。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology

CiteScore

3.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Cochlear Implants International was founded as an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal in response to the growing number of publications in the field of cochlear implants. It was designed to meet a need to include scientific contributions from all the disciplines that are represented in cochlear implant teams: audiology, medicine and surgery, speech therapy and speech pathology, psychology, hearing therapy, radiology, pathology, engineering and acoustics, teaching, and communication. The aim was to found a truly interdisciplinary journal, representing the full breadth of the field of cochlear implantation.