Cochlear Implantation for XXXX With Single-Sided Deafness or Asymmetrical Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review of the Evidence.

@entity1 @entity393 @entity392 @entity2319
OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the literature to evaluate the clinical outcome of cochlear implantation for @entity1 with @entity2319 ( @entity2319 ) or @entity393 ( @entity393 ). DATA SOURCES: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases from their inception up to December 10, 2013 for @entity2319 or @entity393 and cochlear implantation or their synonyms. STUDY SELECTION: In total, 781 articles were retrieved, of which 15 satisfied the eligibility criteria. Our outcomes of interest were speech perception in noise, sound localization, quality of life (QoL), and @entity392 . DATA EXTRACTION: Critical appraisal showed that six studies reported on less than five @entity1 or that they carried a low directness of evidence or a high risk of bias. Therefore, we extracted the data of nine studies (n = 112). @entity1 numbers, age, duration of @entity2319 , classification of @entity2319 , pure tone audiometry, follow-up duration, and outcome measurements were extracted from all nine articles. DATA SYNTHESIS: Because of large heterogeneity between studies, we were not able to pool data in a meta-analysis. We therefore summarized the results of the studies specified per outcome. CONCLUSION: There are no high-level-of-evidence studies concerning cochlear implantation in @entity1 with @entity2319 or @entity393 . Current literature suggests important benefits of cochlear implantation regarding sound localization, QoL, and @entity392 . Varying results were reported for speech perception in noise, possibly caused by the large clinical heterogeneity between studies. Larger and high-quality studies are certainly warranted.
