Question about CI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Frisky Feline

Frisky Feline

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
26,317
Reaction score
87
Last weekend, I learned that anyone who received the CI and they are suppose to have re surgery for the updated CI that only last long for 10 years . More than 10 yrs then those ci users may have some headaches or something going on with head. One of them who had CI were told by doctor that ci users need to replace with CI every 10 years. He went through the another surgery CI. He told one of my friends and then my friend told me. I am not aware about it.

Wonder if its true about 10 yrs of using CI and need to replace it ?
 
Frisky Feline said:
Last weekend, I learned that anyone who received the CI and they are suppose to have re surgery for the updated CI that only last long for 10 years . More than 10 yrs then those ci users may have some headaches or something going on with head. One of them who had CI were told by doctor that ci users need to replace with CI every 10 years. He went through the another surgery CI. He told one of my friends and then my friend told me. I am not aware about it.

Wonder if its true about 10 yrs of using CI and need to replace it ?
Click to expand...

I'll get back to you in 7 years. ;)

Honestly, I doubt it because I'm guessing you are gonna have a lot of responses that are not correlated with the 10 year mark.

Type of response 1: Problems with the implant, but WAY before (more likely) or WAY after 10 year mark.
Type of response 2: No problems with implant at all for those who've had it 10+ years.
 
I wish I had the reference to this, but I don't recall where I saw it: I've read that most problems people have with implants occur in the first year, that's when failures typically happen if they are going to. And I've met a whole bunch of young people who've had CIs in place for longer than 10 years.

At least one of the CI firms say the internal electrode array and receiver technology is physically designed to last for 70 years. That's theoretical, though, and based on the materials, I assume -- obviously no one has given CIs a 70-year long.

Could it be that the discussion was around replacing the external processor and not the implant? We've already had one upgrade in less than 4 years.

And when you think about high-tech equipment, even if it's still plugging along, how many of us would want to use something from 70 years ago? I'm looking at a 6 year old computer right now that I'd like to replace, even though it works just fine. We laugh at those massive cell phones and disc man cd players / boomboxes from the 80s now. I'm hoping that many upgrades can be made to her external components, with the existing internal parts used for a long while as a straightforward delivery system, but I'm suspecting my daughter will have an opportunity to replace her implant when she's a young adult, if not sooner.
 
Re-implants are done without too much problems.. MAUD database is having several references to it..
here is an article by Rachel whose CI stopped working after 13 years, and explaining how much time it took to get back to "normal".

Be sure to start a the bottom of her story, as the last post is at the top..
Cochlear Implant Failure Experiences
 
Cloggy said:
Interesting link... Hard to read with all the repetitive language.. But OK.. However, I stopped reading when I read.. "attached to the brain"
GONE out the window went all credibility.. If this is the way people are informing other people....
Click to expand...

...right. And I googled it all up... Seems credible.
 
Ok, then you might find this more credible. But the blogger does raise an interesting question - why aren't failures and malfunctions being reported? If one truly wants an unbiased view of CIs then all information should be reported, not just the more favourable reports:

Reliability and complication... [Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI

Characteristics of malfunctioning channels in p... [Laryngoscope. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS:

To examine the characteristics of pediatric cochlear implant channel malfunction preceding device failure.
STUDY DESIGN:

: Retrospective review.
METHODS:

All pediatric patients who underwent cochlear implantation at a tertiary academic medical center were reviewed regarding device type, reason for replacement, time to replacement, and timing and pattern of channel faults in failed versus nonfailed devices.
RESULTS:

Between 1993 and 2008, 264 pediatric cochlear implantations were performed. With an average 894-day follow-up, the replacement rate was 9.5% (25/264). Reasons for replacement were device failure (6.4%), medical/surgical failure (2.3%), and obsolescence (0.8%). Replacement rates were comparable among Advanced Bionics (13.3%), Cochlear Corporation (6.3%), and MED-EL (10.3%) devices. Fifty-two cochlear implants developed at least one channel fault, and 13 eventually progressed to failure requiring replacement. MED-EL devices comprised 12 of these 13 failures. At the 12-month follow-up interval, one, three, and five channel faults predicted 40%, 75%, and 100% probabilities of eventual electrode failure, respectively. Channels destined to fail demonstrated small, yet statistically significant, impedance elevations 12 months before failure and large elevations 3 months before failure.
CONCLUSIONS:

Replacement of cochlear implants in pediatric patients is common and is due to device malfunction about one half of the time. Earlier initial channel fault, earlier subsequent channel faults, adjacent channel faults, and a greater total number of channel faults were associated with the need for replacement surgery. Elevations in a channel's impedance should raise the concern for an impending failure. These predictors can help the cochlear implant team when considering surgery to replace the device."

It makes me wince to think of a baby having to go through surgery again for a replacement device.

As a member of ProblemCIs group on yahoo, it appears that getting re-implanted is not always an easy smooth process and waiting periods could take a while and this results in some trauma for some patients.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Ok, then you might find this more credible. But the blogger does raise an interesting question - why aren't failures and malfunctions being reported? If one truly wants an unbiased view of CIs then all information should be reported, not just the more favourable reports:

Reliability and complication... [Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI

Characteristics of malfunctioning channels in p... [Laryngoscope. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS:

To examine the characteristics of pediatric cochlear implant channel malfunction preceding device failure.
STUDY DESIGN:

: Retrospective review.
METHODS:

All pediatric patients who underwent cochlear implantation at a tertiary academic medical center were reviewed regarding device type, reason for replacement, time to replacement, and timing and pattern of channel faults in failed versus nonfailed devices.
RESULTS:

Between 1993 and 2008, 264 pediatric cochlear implantations were performed. With an average 894-day follow-up, the replacement rate was 9.5% (25/264). Reasons for replacement were device failure (6.4%), medical/surgical failure (2.3%), and obsolescence (0.8%). Replacement rates were comparable among Advanced Bionics (13.3%), Cochlear Corporation (6.3%), and MED-EL (10.3%) devices. Fifty-two cochlear implants developed at least one channel fault, and 13 eventually progressed to failure requiring replacement. MED-EL devices comprised 12 of these 13 failures. At the 12-month follow-up interval, one, three, and five channel faults predicted 40%, 75%, and 100% probabilities of eventual electrode failure, respectively. Channels destined to fail demonstrated small, yet statistically significant, impedance elevations 12 months before failure and large elevations 3 months before failure.
CONCLUSIONS:

Replacement of cochlear implants in pediatric patients is common and is due to device malfunction about one half of the time. Earlier initial channel fault, earlier subsequent channel faults, adjacent channel faults, and a greater total number of channel faults were associated with the need for replacement surgery. Elevations in a channel's impedance should raise the concern for an impending failure. These predictors can help the cochlear implant team when considering surgery to replace the device."

It makes me wince to think of a baby having to go through surgery again for a replacement device.

As a member of ProblemCIs group on yahoo, it appears that getting re-implanted is not always an easy smooth process and waiting periods could take a while and this results in some trauma for some patients.
Click to expand...

I know a lady who got implanted.... explant/implanted.... explant/implanted.. in the same year.... she was 5.

And you're bringing this harder than I am.... Last time I went into a numbers debate with Grendel, I said closer to 1:100 than 1:1000 and with what you said.......... Just verifies what I am bringing out to the front.
 
DeafCaroline said:
article
Click to expand...
excellent. Thanks for the info..
I agree.. Looks bad...
Mind you.. It's over a period of 15 years.. Hope it has improved in the last 5 years.. Still.. Looks bad..

But it looks that re-implanting is not a problem...
 
Cloggy said:
Including the "attached to the brain" part?

I have to find a definition of "Attached to the brain"
Click to expand...

One could interpret that differently, It's stuck to a nerve ending, no? That connects to the brain, so in a way its attached to the brain.

Then again, I am not the type to say "oh that one sentence is not credible, therefore the whole message is not honest" and stick my head up my butt.
 
Cloggy said:
excellent. Thanks for the info..
I agree.. Looks bad...
Mind you.. It's over a period of 15 years.. Hope it has improved in the last 5 years.. Still.. Looks bad..

But it looks that re-implanting is not a problem...
Click to expand...

Science - The Globe and Mail

This article was published 6 days ago.

You say re-implantation is not a problem. The bigger issue here is devices being implanted before they were rigorously tested for durability and functionality. Re-implantation is not like getting a new bandaid - it's a rather costly laborious emotional procedure to go through...again.
 
Frisky Feline said:
Last weekend, I learned that anyone who received the CI and they are suppose to have re surgery for the updated CI that only last long for 10 years ........
Wonder if its true about 10 yrs of using CI and need to replace it ?
Click to expand...

Just found this piece of info:
rick48 said:
My daughter is 24 and was implanted in 1989 at age 2
Click to expand...
 
I am interested in finding more information to see if anyone who have RE SURGERY with CI due to many reasons what CI went FAIL. So far, I know two people who needed re surgery when they were young.

Sure, I am concerned about my hub that he has a CI. Hope he does not have to go through this thing with hospital. I ll wait when he hits close to 50 or before 50 to see if his CI is still good. I hope so!
 
Cloggy said:
Just found this piece of info:
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by rick48
My daughter is 24 and was implanted in 1989 at age 2
Click to expand...

Both sides of this argument get ridiculous in their claims, and none of you are credible, but I believe she was reimplanted if you strive at all for accuracy.
 
Wirelessly posted

you don't have to be reimplanted until the device stops working. That could be 20 years after surgery, or unfortuantely, 20 minutes. It all depends on the actual device that goes inside you. I know of people who still have their devices from the 90's and others who are much less lucky.

as for the "attached to the brain" garbage. The electrodes lie inside the cochlea, inside the inner ear. It does not touch the nerve. Also, the rest of the device is outside the skull, just under the skin. Still not touching or "attached to the brain" whatsoever.
 
Bottesini said:
Both sides of this argument get ridiculous in their claims, and none of you are credible, but I believe she was reimplanted if you strive at all for accuracy.
Click to expand...
Good point...
... and we'll check with Rick48
--------
p.s.
Found it...
rick48 said:
Most of the children who were my daughter's friends growing up were implanted around 88-92 and my daughter is the only one who needed to be reimplanted but we were aware that although the internal part is intended to last a lifetime, there was no guarantee that it would.
Click to expand...
Wondering how long she had it before re-implant.. Minimum of 11 years... Maximum 21...
Like faire_jour said...
 
Last edited:
Cloggy said:
Just found this piece of info:
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by rick48
My daughter is 24 and was implanted in 1989 at age 2
Click to expand...

Bottesini said:
Both sides of this argument get ridiculous in their claims, and none of you are credible, but I believe she was reimplanted if you strive at all for accuracy.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, Botts. Rick48 has since posted that she's been since re-implanted since her original implant failed (or died, whatever it is called).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top