The minimum age for cochlear implantation has been reduced to 12 months in an effort to provide auditory stimulation to children with hearing loss during early development. Because behavioral measures in such young children are limited, objective measures such as the electrically evoked compound action potential (EAP) from the auditory nerve are needed to facilitate measurement of stimulation level requirements. We assessed EAPs recorded by the Nucleus 24 neural response telemetry (NRT) system in children who underwent implantation between 12 and 24 months of age. We recorded EAPs in 37 such children (mean age at implantation, 18.1 ± 3.6 months). The EAPs were of large amplitude, and thresholds fell between behavioral T and C levels. A correction factor applied to EAP thresholds provided useful predictions of T levels. The EAPs can be used to ensure that even very young children receive auditory stimulation with their cochlear implants upon device activation.
O'DonoghueGMNikolopoulosTPArchboldSMTaitM. Speech perception in children after cochlear implantation. Am J Otol1998;19:762–7.
2.
TylerRSFryauf-BertschyHKelsayDMGantzBJWoodworthGPParkinsonA. Speech perception by prelingually deaf children using cochlear implants. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1997;117:180–7.
3.
KieferJGallVDesloovereCKnechtRMikowskiAvon IlbergC. A follow-up study of long-term results after cochlear implantation in children and adolescents. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol1996;253:158–66.
4.
NikolopoulosTPO'DonoghueGMArchboldS. Age at implantation: Its importance in pediatric cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope1999;109:595–9.
5.
Fryauf-BertschyHTylerRSKelsayDMGantzBJWoodworthGG. Cochlear implant use by prelingually deafened children: The influences of age at implant and length of device use. J Speech Lang Hear Res1997;40:183–99.
6.
GibsonWPHerridgeSRennieM. Importance of age in the selection of congenitally deaf children for cochlear implant surgery. Adv Otorhinolaryngol1997;52:78–81.
7.
WaltzmanSBCohenNLGomolinRH. Open-set speech perception in congenitally deaf children using cochlear implants. Am J Otol1997;18:342–9.
8.
ManriqueMCervera-PazFJHuarteAPerezNMolinaMGarcia-TapiaR. Cerebral auditory plasticity and cochlear implants. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol1999;49(suppl 1):S193–S197.
9.
RobinsonK. Implications of developmental plasticity for the language acquisition of deaf children with cochlear implants. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol1998;46:71–80.
10.
BrownCJHughesMLLukBAbbasPJWolaverAGervaisJ. The relationship between EAP and EABR thresholds and levels used to program the Nucleus 24 speech processor: Data from adults. Ear Hear2000;21:151–63.
11.
BrownCJHughesMLLopezSMAbbasPJ. Relationship between EABR thresholds and levels used to program the CLARION speech processor. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl1999;108(suppl 177):50–7.
12.
TruyEGallegoSChanalJMColletLMorgonA. Correlation between electrical auditory brainstem response and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic cochlear implant users. Laryngoscope1998;108:554–9.
13.
HodgesAVRuthRALambertPRBalkanyTJ. Electric auditory brain-stem responses in Nucleus multichannel cochlear implant users. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1994;120:1093–9.
14.
ShallopJKVanDykeLGoinDWMischkeRE. Prediction of behavioral threshold and comfort values for Nucleus 22-channel implant patients from electrical auditory brain stem response test results. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol1991;100:896–8.
15.
HodgesAVButtsSDolan-AshSBalkanyTJ. Using electrically evoked auditory reflex thresholds to fit the CLARION cochlear implant. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl1999;108(suppl 177):64–8.
16.
ShallopJK. Objective electrophysiological measures from cochlear implant patients. Ear Hear1993;14:58–63.
17.
HughesMLBrownCJAbbasPJWolaverAAGervaisJP. Comparison of EAP thresholds with MAP levels in the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant: Data from children. Ear Hear2000;21:164–74.
18.
ShallopJKFacerGWPetersonA. Neural response telemetry with the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant. Laryngoscope1999;109:1755–9.
19.
BrownCJAbbasPJGantzBJ. Preliminary experience with neural response telemetry in the Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant. Am J Otol1998;19:320–7.
20.
BrownCJAbbasPJBorlandJBertschyMR. Electrically evoked whole nerve action potentials in Ineraid cochlear implant users: Responses to different stimulating electrode configurations and comparison to psychophysical responses. J Speech Hear Res1996;39:453–67.
21.
AbbasPJBrownCJShallopJK. Summary of results using the Nucleus CI24M implant to record the electrically evoked compound action potential. Ear Hear1999;20:45–59.
22.
GantzBJBrownCJAbbasPJ. Intraoperative measures of electrically evoked auditory nerve compound action potential. Am J Otol1994;15:137–44.
23.
NadolJBJr. Patterns of neural degeneration in the human cochlea and auditory nerve: Implications for cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg1997;117:220–8.
