兩側植入不同人工電子耳之比較－病例報告

Comparison of Binaural Cochlear with Different Devices - Case Report

陸義發(Yi-Fa Lu) ； 劉樹玉(Shu-Yu Liu) ； 黃為賢(Wei-Hsien Huang) ； 黃俊生(Tsun-Sheng Huang)

《中華民國耳鼻喉科醫學會雜誌》 31卷2期 (1996/04) Pp. 178-184

https://doi.org/10.6286/1996.31.2.178

摘要

由於一般人工電子耳植入的病患不同，而不同人工電子耳裝置的設計也不同，甚至同一個病人的兩耳在造成聽障的病理變化和失聽時間長短也不盡相同，所以要直接比較不同的人工電子耳裝置植入的效果會有相當的困難。本科經歷1例1985年6月因車禍造成兩耳重度聽障的37歲男性，在1986年1月右耳接受3M/House單頻道人工電子耳植入術，病人反應人工電子耳的確對他有幫助，所以又於1994年1月左耳接受Nucleus22頻道人工電子耳植入，我們基於兩耳有同一病因來比較這兩種人工電子耳裝置在聽覺及語音辨識上的表現，發現Nucleus22頻道人工電子耳有較佳的成績，尤其是在開放式測驗更有意義。這是國內首例在同一個病患兩耳接受不同人工電子耳裝置後的比較；文中並討論兩耳同時使用人工電子耳的可行性。

關鍵字

3M/House單頻道人工電子耳裝置 ； Nucleus22頻道人工電子耳裝置 ； 語音辨識

並列摘要

It is difficult to compare different cochlear implant devices because patients have differences in degrees of neuronal survival, duration of deafness, central processing capabilities, motivation and communicative needs. There are also wide variations in the designs and testing protocols of different devices. A 37-year-old post-lingually deaf male received cochlear implantation of a 3 M/House device in the right ear in Jan., 1986 and then a Nucleus 22 device in the left ear in Jan., 1994. Owing to head injury in a traffic accident, the patient was deaf in both ears simultaneously. The allows us to compare the function of both devices presumably similar conditions.
In this case, the Nucleus 22-channel cochlear implant is superior to 3 M/House single channel implant in performances on both auditory and speech perception. We also discuss the effects of simultaneous binaural electrical stimulations with these two devices. We feel that cochlear implantation in the contralateral ear is an acceptable option in selected patients desiring an upgraded implant without removal of a functioning implant.

並列關鍵字

3M/House single channel device ； Nucleus 22-channel device ； speech recognition