Outcomes of cochlear implantation in Usher syndrome: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This study is a systematic review of the literature which seeks to evaluate auditory and quality of life (QOL) outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with Usher syndrome.

METHODS

Systematic review of studies indexed in Medline via PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov was performed up to March 9th 2022, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Patient demographics, comorbidity, details of cochlear implantation, auditory, and QOL outcomes were extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

33 studies reported over 217 cochlear implants in 187 patients with Usher syndrome, comprising subtypes 1 (56 patients), 2 (9 patients), 3 (23 patients), and not specified (99 patients). Auditory outcomes included improved sound detection, speech perception, and speech intelligibility. QOL outcomes were reported for 75 patients, with benefit reported in the majority.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients with Usher syndrome develop improved auditory outcomes after cochlear implantation with early implantation being an important factor.

Outcomes of cochlear implantation in children with Usher syndrome: a long-term observation

PURPOSE

To evaluate auditory performance and speech intelligibility of children with Usher syndrome up to 10 years after cochlear implantation.

METHODS

Thirty-five children with USH were compared to 46 non-syndromic patients regarding age at implantation. Auditory performance and speech intelligibility was assessed with standard tools. Genetic counseling, vestibular tests, imaging studies, and ophthalmological findings were evaluated, depending on the availability.

RESULTS

The mean age of implantation in USH children was 6.3 years (SD 4.6, range 0.3-17.6 years). Post-implantation values of the studied parameters were compared between USH and NS children and presented as follows: PTA = 25.0 dB HL vs. 28.4, CAP = 5.3 vs. 5.1, SIR = 4.1 vs. 3.9, MAIS = 82.3% vs. 80.5%, MUSS = 81.8% vs. 76.6%. There were no statistically significant differences between the USH and NS groups (p > 0.005). USH patients reached a higher score ceiling earlier compared to NS patients. Children implanted before 3 years of age achieved significantly higher results than older children in USH and NS groups (p < 0.005). In all patients with USH, the electroretinogram was abnormal. Vestibular examination was abnormal in 29 of 31 patients with USH1. Imaging studies revealed no inner ear or auditory nerve anomalies in patients with USH.

CONCLUSION

Cochlear implantation successfully improves auditory performance and speech intelligibility in patients with USH, especially those implanted under 3 years of age. The electroretinogram is the only reliable test to establish a diagnosis of USH. Logopedic outcomes are associated with early implantation, and early diagnosis of USH contributes to optimizing speech therapy.

[Usher type I syndrome in children: genotype/phenotype correlation and cochlear implant benefits]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefit of cochlear implant in children presenting an Usher type 1 syndrome (speech understanding, speech production intelligibility, academic performance) and to search any correlation between the phenotype and the genotype in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective case series analysis about 13 implanted Usher type I children. Cochlear implantation was performed from 1995 to 2005. Our population was divided in three groups: group 1 (implantation between 1 and 3 years of age); group 2 (implantation between 4 and 7 years of age) and group 3 (implantation between 14 and 17 years of age). Postoperative speech perception, speech production intelligibility and education settings were evaluated.

RESULTS

Molecular genetic analysis was performed in 11 patients and pathogenic mutations were identified in all cases: (mutation in myosin 7A gene in 5 cases; mutation in cadherin 23 gene in 6 cases). Four new mutations 2 in the MYO7A gene and 2 in the CDH23 gene never reported before were found. Walking delay and hearing level were not statistically correlated with the genotype abnormalities found. The speech discrimination skills, the speech production intelligibility and the academic performance were better in the group 1 children than the group 2 children after cochlear implantation. All the children of group 1 but one were in mainstreaming education. Specific language impairment was identified in two children of group 1. The group 3 children could not achieve open-set perceptive tasks after implantation--only closed-set word test can be done and their speech production remained unintelligible after cochlear implantation.

CONCLUSION

Molecular analysis of Usher type I syndrome can ascertain the diagnosis in spite of the genetic heterogeneity. In this study, clinical symptoms weren't correlated with genotypic mutations. Speech discrimination skills, speech production quality, and academic performance were correlated with the age at implant.

Audiologic performance and benefit of cochlear implantation in Usher syndrome type I

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the benefit and performance of cochlear implantation in patients with Usher syndrome type 1 (USH1).

METHODS

Fourteen patients with a clinical diagnosis of USH1 were included. Mutation analysis of USH1 genes was performed in all of them. All patients filled in the G(C)BI questionnaire, which measures the benefit of implantation. In addition, equivalent hearing level scores (EHL) were calculated to measure performance. Correlations between the mentioned parameters were studied.

RESULTS

One or two pathogenic mutations were identified in seven of the 14 examined patients. Similar to previous studies, it was demonstrated that implantation at an earlier age results in better performance than implantation at higher age. Cochlear implantation performed within the first 2 decades of life was beneficial to 13 of 14 (93%) of the patients with USH1. Finally, the EHL score and the G(C)BI score showed a significant correlation; the benefit of implantation increases with a decreasing EHL score.

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation in patients with USH1 improves the audiologic performance when patients are implanted at an earlier age and is beneficial according to the G(C)BI when performed within the first 2 decades of life.

Quality of Life and Cochlear Implantation in Usher Syndrome Type I

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this descriptive, retrospective study were to evaluate quality of life, hearing, and vision in patients with Usher syndrome type I with and without cochlear implant.

METHODS

Quality of life (QoL) of 14 patients with Usher type I (USH1) with a cochlear implant (CI) (seven adults, seven children) was compared with those of 14 patients with USH1 without a CI (12 adults, two children) by means of three questionnaires: NCIQ, SF12, and the Usher Lifestyle Survey. Additional information on hearing level was obtained by the equivalent hearing loss (EHL) principle and on the visual deterioration by the functional vision score (FVS).

RESULTS

A significant benefit of CI was seen in the hearing-specific questionnaire NCIQ. This difference could not be detected in the generic SF12 survey. The Usher Lifestyle Survey indicated that patients with USH1 with a CI tend to be able to live an independent life more easily than the profoundly deaf unimplanted patients with USH1. EHL and FVS scores varied in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall QoL can be enhanced by CI in patients with USH1, although effects are mostly seen in hearing-related QoL items.