Robert J Macielak, Lisa Zhang, Diana Hallak, Desi P Schoo, Edward E Dodson, Oliver F Adunka, Yin Ren
{"title":"评估人工耳蜗患者摘除设备后的患者动机。","authors":"Robert J Macielak, Lisa Zhang, Diana Hallak, Desi P Schoo, Edward E Dodson, Oliver F Adunka, Yin Ren","doi":"10.1097/MAO.0000000000004513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess indications behind cochlear implant (CI) removal without subsequent re-implantation.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Patients who underwent CI explantation between January 2013 and December 2022.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Explantation of CI device without ipsilateral re-implantation.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Indications for and audiometric testing before CI explantation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Within a cohort of 743 CI patients, 35 patients (5%) underwent implant revision. A total of 16 patients (2%) underwent explantation without ipsilateral re-implantation (mean age of 51 yr [SD, 23]), and 19 (3%) underwent explantation followed by re-implantation (mean age of 51 yr [SD, 18]). The average time between CI insertion and removal was 56 months (SD, 72). Six explantations (6 of 16 [37.5%]) were due to infectious complications: 2 (13%) did not undergo re-implantation given severe life-threatening comorbidities, 1 (6%) underwent simultaneous contralateral implantation, 1 (6%) experienced insurance barriers preventing re-implantation, and 2 (13%) were lost to follow-up. Ten patients (10 of 16 [62.5%]) underwent device removal for noninfectious indications, including 6 (38%) with non-audiologic symptoms attributed to CI, 3 (19%) who required repeated MRIs and desired avoidance of peri-imaging procedures, and 1 (6%) who had poor audiometric outcomes due to cochlear ossification. Patients who were not re-implanted performed worse on AzBio (35% versus 59%; p = 0.10) and CNC testing (27% versus. 70%; p = 0.02) after initial successful implantation compared with those who did undergo re-implantation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients undergo explantation for a variety of reasons, with ill-defined symptoms being the motive in over half of the cases. These desires are compounded by poor postoperative audiometric performance, which likely hinders the patient's desire to undergo re-implantation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19732,"journal":{"name":"Otology & Neurotology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Patient Motivation Behind Device Removal in Cochlear Implant Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Robert J Macielak, Lisa Zhang, Diana Hallak, Desi P Schoo, Edward E Dodson, Oliver F Adunka, Yin Ren\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MAO.0000000000004513\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess indications behind cochlear implant (CI) removal without subsequent re-implantation.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Patients who underwent CI explantation between January 2013 and December 2022.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Explantation of CI device without ipsilateral re-implantation.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Indications for and audiometric testing before CI explantation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Within a cohort of 743 CI patients, 35 patients (5%) underwent implant revision. A total of 16 patients (2%) underwent explantation without ipsilateral re-implantation (mean age of 51 yr [SD, 23]), and 19 (3%) underwent explantation followed by re-implantation (mean age of 51 yr [SD, 18]). The average time between CI insertion and removal was 56 months (SD, 72). Six explantations (6 of 16 [37.5%]) were due to infectious complications: 2 (13%) did not undergo re-implantation given severe life-threatening comorbidities, 1 (6%) underwent simultaneous contralateral implantation, 1 (6%) experienced insurance barriers preventing re-implantation, and 2 (13%) were lost to follow-up. Ten patients (10 of 16 [62.5%]) underwent device removal for noninfectious indications, including 6 (38%) with non-audiologic symptoms attributed to CI, 3 (19%) who required repeated MRIs and desired avoidance of peri-imaging procedures, and 1 (6%) who had poor audiometric outcomes due to cochlear ossification. Patients who were not re-implanted performed worse on AzBio (35% versus 59%; p = 0.10) and CNC testing (27% versus. 70%; p = 0.02) after initial successful implantation compared with those who did undergo re-implantation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients undergo explantation for a variety of reasons, with ill-defined symptoms being the motive in over half of the cases. These desires are compounded by poor postoperative audiometric performance, which likely hinders the patient's desire to undergo re-implantation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Otology & Neurotology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Otology & Neurotology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000004513\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Otology & Neurotology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000004513","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating Patient Motivation Behind Device Removal in Cochlear Implant Patients.
Objective: To assess indications behind cochlear implant (CI) removal without subsequent re-implantation.
Patients: Patients who underwent CI explantation between January 2013 and December 2022.
Interventions: Explantation of CI device without ipsilateral re-implantation.
Main outcome measures: Indications for and audiometric testing before CI explantation.
Results: Within a cohort of 743 CI patients, 35 patients (5%) underwent implant revision. A total of 16 patients (2%) underwent explantation without ipsilateral re-implantation (mean age of 51 yr [SD, 23]), and 19 (3%) underwent explantation followed by re-implantation (mean age of 51 yr [SD, 18]). The average time between CI insertion and removal was 56 months (SD, 72). Six explantations (6 of 16 [37.5%]) were due to infectious complications: 2 (13%) did not undergo re-implantation given severe life-threatening comorbidities, 1 (6%) underwent simultaneous contralateral implantation, 1 (6%) experienced insurance barriers preventing re-implantation, and 2 (13%) were lost to follow-up. Ten patients (10 of 16 [62.5%]) underwent device removal for noninfectious indications, including 6 (38%) with non-audiologic symptoms attributed to CI, 3 (19%) who required repeated MRIs and desired avoidance of peri-imaging procedures, and 1 (6%) who had poor audiometric outcomes due to cochlear ossification. Patients who were not re-implanted performed worse on AzBio (35% versus 59%; p = 0.10) and CNC testing (27% versus. 70%; p = 0.02) after initial successful implantation compared with those who did undergo re-implantation.
Conclusions: Patients undergo explantation for a variety of reasons, with ill-defined symptoms being the motive in over half of the cases. These desires are compounded by poor postoperative audiometric performance, which likely hinders the patient's desire to undergo re-implantation.
期刊介绍:
Otology & Neurotology publishes original articles relating to both clinical and basic science aspects of otology, neurotology, and cranial base surgery. As the foremost journal in its field, it has become the favored place for publishing the best of new science relating to the human ear and its diseases. The broadly international character of its contributing authors, editorial board, and readership provides the Journal its decidedly global perspective.