• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

History of the Cochlear Implant

by Gretchen Henkel • April 1, 2013

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Dr. Gantz maintains that there need not be a sense of urgency to implant children prior to the age of eight months, the age when a behavioral audiogram can be performed. Based on 25 years of longitudinal follow-up on children receiving CIs at his institution, he has found that at age 7 years, children who had received implants between the ages of 2 and 4 years did not show significantly different reading, language and speech perception from those who received the implants between 11 months and 2 years of age.” If you implant an infant who might have some low frequency residual hearing, you are destroying it, and that could be very useful to preserve,” he said. “The residual low frequency acoustic hearing might assist the individual to hear better in noisy environments and to appreciate music in the future.”

You Might Also Like

  • Milestones in Development of Cochlear Implant Technology
  • New Cochlear Implant Improves Hearing in Subset of Patients
  • Best Timing for Second Implant in Pediatric Bilateral Cochlear Implantation
  • Hybrid Cochlear Implant Helps Preserve Residual Low-Frequency Hearing
Explore This Issue
April 2013

Adrien A. Eshraghi, MD, associate professor and chief at Jackson Memorial Otology and Neurotology Clinics and director of the University of Miami Hearing Research Laboratory, department of otolaryngology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, and colleagues established that the implantation procedure itself can induce apoptosis, thus impeding reestablishment of residual hearing in damaged cochlear structures. Although manufacturers have worked to make coils that are less traumatic, Dr. Eshraghi pointed out that insertion of the CI electrode into the cochlea stimulates the production of inflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress, resulting in irreversible damage. His laboratory, in collaboration with microbiologist Thomas R. van de Water, PhD, professor and director of the Cochlear Implant Research Program at the University of Miami, is now working to better understand apoptosis post-implantation and to develop drug delivery strategies to prevent the problem. By reducing implantation trauma, he said, “you may be able to use electric acoustic stimulation with a hybrid device, or possibly even use the patient’s residual hearing.”

Cochlear Implants and the Deaf Community

Cochlear Implants and the Deaf Community
Early developers of cochlear implants faced resistance from the scientific community during the 1970s and early 1980s. In 1990, the FDA approved multiple channel cochlear implants for children. Many in the deaf community were critical of implantation in young children, arguing that the procedure was unethical without the patients’ consent, and that implants would deprive children of an essential part of their cultural identity.

Irene W. Leigh, PhD, professor emerita at Gallaudet University in Washington, DC, and co-editor of Cochlear Implants: Evolving Perspectives (Gallaudet University Press, 2011) notes that although a number of deaf individuals still feel that CIs remain a threat, “the Deaf community is not a homogenous entity and there are diverse opinions on this topic.” The National Association of the Deaf, along with an increasing number of educators, now take a bilingual approach in working with deaf children who have received cochlear implants, she said. The Science of Learning Center on Visual Language and Visual Learning at Gallaudet is currently investigating how learning occurs through the visual pathway for both deaf and hearing children.—GH

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Single Page

Filed Under: Features, Otology/Neurotology, Pediatric Tagged With: cochlear implant, hearing loss, pediatricsIssue: April 2013

You Might Also Like:

  • Milestones in Development of Cochlear Implant Technology
  • New Cochlear Implant Improves Hearing in Subset of Patients
  • Best Timing for Second Implant in Pediatric Bilateral Cochlear Implantation
  • Hybrid Cochlear Implant Helps Preserve Residual Low-Frequency Hearing

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939