The effect of canal diameter on audiologic results in patients with cochlear implantation with large vestibular aqueduct syndrome

Creative Commons License

Demir B., Cesur S., Incaz S., Alberalar N. D. , Ciprut A., Batman C.

EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, vol.277, pp.743-750, 2020 (Peer-Reviewed Journal) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 277
  • Publication Date: 2020
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s00405-019-05764-3
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded, Scopus, Academic Search Premier, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database
  • Page Numbers: pp.743-750


Purpose To compare audiologic results according to vestibular aqueduct (VA) diameter in patients who have undergone cochlear implantation and were diagnosed with LVAS. Methods This was a retrospective study detailing the outcomes of 18 patients with LVAS and 18 patients undergone cochlear implants. VA diameter was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Categories of Auditory Perception (CAP) and Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) were assessed in all patients, and speech audiometry, including speech recognition thresholds (SRT) and word discrimination scores, was applied for all subjects who were able to perform these tests. All audiologic parameters were compared between patients with and without LVAS, and the relationship of these parameters with VA diameter was investigated. Results The control group consisted of 18 subjects (5 males, 13 females), ranging in age between 2 and 34 years (mean 13.17 +/- 8.97 years). The research group consisted of 18 subjects (8 males, 10 females), ranging in age between 2 and 35 years (mean 13.28 +/- 8.96 years). There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of SIR and CAP pre-post differences (Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.05), with higher averages in the LVAS group. No statistically significant correlations were found between VA diameter on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging and the audiologic variables collected. Conclusions Patients with LVAS benefit from cochlear implant surgery and VA parameters do not affect audiologic parameters.