Prospective Study of Round Window Versus Cochleostomy Approach to CI Surgery

Sponsor
Mayo Clinic (Other)
Overall Status
Terminated
CT.gov ID
NCT02466763
Collaborator
(none)
39
1
2
46.4
0.8

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

To the investigators' knowledge, no clinical study has prospectively investigated the relationship between surgical insertion technique, intracochlear electrode location, and postoperative hearing outcomes. To this end, the investigators are conducting a multicenter prospective randomized controlled double-blinded study comparing round window and cochleostomy cochlear implant electrode insertion.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Procedure: Cochlear implant surgery
N/A

Detailed Description

Cochlear implant procedure has become the standard of care for patients with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Successful outcomes are dependent on extrinsic and intrinsic factors. Significant predictive factors for hearing outcomes in patients with CIs have been previously reported. These include, but are not limited to, duration of deafness, level of preimplant speech recognition, pre/postlingual status, and the coupling of device electrodes. Recipient age does not appear to have a significant impact on hearing outcomes in elderly candidates.

A number of recent studies have proposed that intraoperative factors may be important determinants of electrode location and possibly of audiological outcome. Preliminary reports suggest that intracochlear electrode position- specifically, placement within the ST-is associated with improved audiological outcomes. Additionally, different surgical techniques have been proposed to minimize trauma during electrode insertion and to increase the likelihood of placement within the ST - namely round window and anteroinferior cochleostomy electrode insertion.

Currently, the best surgical approach for electrode insertion is highly debated, fueled by a lack of strong evidence to support one method over another. While a number of CI centers have begun to utilize a round window approach, many large volume centers in the United States and world wide continue to routinely employ cochleostomy electrode insertions. With an increasing number of patients being implanted with greater degrees of residual hearing, such data will become critical towards reducing intracochlear injury and optimizing patient outcomes. To the investigators' knowledge, no clinical study has prospectively investigated the relationship between surgical insertion technique, intracochlear electrode location, and postoperative hearing outcomes. To this end, the investigators are initiating a multicenter prospective randomized controlled double-blinded study comparing round window and cochleostomy cochlear implant electrode insertion.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment :
39 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Masking:
Double (Participant, Investigator)
Primary Purpose:
Treatment
Official Title:
Prospective Randomized Controlled Double-blinded Study Comparing Cochlear Implantation Through a Round Window Versus Cochleostomy Approach
Study Start Date :
May 1, 2015
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Mar 12, 2019
Actual Study Completion Date :
Mar 12, 2019

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Active Comparator: round window

Half of the participants will be randomized to the round window technique of cochlear implant device electrode insertion. Intervention for participants randomized to the round window arm include having the round window technique used for the electrode insertion during the participant's cochlear implant surgery. Participants in this arm of the study will also have a post operative CT scan at about three months after surgery.

Procedure: Cochlear implant surgery
Surgical placement of a cochlear implant device.

Active Comparator: cochleostomy

Half of the participants will be randomized to the cochleostomy technique of cochlear implant device electrode insertion. For the participants randomized to the cochleostomy arm, the surgeon will use a cochleostomy technique for the electrode insertion during the participant's cochlear implant surgery. Participants in this arm of the study will also have a post operative CT scan at about three months after surgery.

Procedure: Cochlear implant surgery
Surgical placement of a cochlear implant device.

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

  1. Cochlear implant electrode location after surgery [about three months post op]

    a standard temporal bone CT scan will be used to show the location of the electrode in the cochlea

Secondary Outcome Measures

  1. Participant levels of speech perception [Preoperatively, and at approximately 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively]

    standard audiometry speech perception tests will be administered

  2. Participant levels of word recognition scores [Preoperatively, and at approximately 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively]

    standard audiometry CNC word score test will be administered

  3. Participant levels of sentence recognition scores [Preoperatively, and at approximately 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively]

    standard audiometry AZBio sentence score test will be administered

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:
18 Years and Older
Sexes Eligible for Study:
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
No
Inclusion criteria are:
  • 18 years of age or older,

  • less than a 10-year duration of deafness in the ear to be implanted,

  • primary surgery,

  • normal shaped cochleae,

  • no retrocochlear pathology, and

  • grossly normal cognitive function.

Exclusion criteria are:
  • less than 18 years of age,

  • prelingual deafness, or

  • greater than 10-years duration of deafness in the ear to be implanted;

  • prior otologic surgery in the implanted ear (excluding tympanostomy tube placement),

  • inner ear malformation present in the ear to be implanted,

  • retrocochlear pathology present in the auditory system to be implanted,

  • developmental delay or known cognitive impairment, or

  • pregnancy.

Contacts and Locations

Locations

Site City State Country Postal Code
1 Mayo Clinic in Rochester Rochester Minnesota United States 55905

Sponsors and Collaborators

  • Mayo Clinic

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Matthew Carlson, MD, Mayo Clinic

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Additional Information:

Publications

None provided.
Responsible Party:
Matthew L. Carlson, M.D., PI, Mayo Clinic
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT02466763
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • 15-000576
First Posted:
Jun 9, 2015
Last Update Posted:
Jun 26, 2019
Last Verified:
Jun 1, 2019
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
No
Plan to Share IPD:
No
Keywords provided by Matthew L. Carlson, M.D., PI, Mayo Clinic
Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Study Results

No Results Posted as of Jun 26, 2019