{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012329656067488644, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0006489292667099286, 'mean_word_length': 5.425, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The management of cochlear nerve deficiency

Abstract The assessment process is critical in deciding whether a profoundly deaf child with cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) will be suitable for a cochlear or auditory brainstem implant (ABI). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using submillimetric T2 weighted gradient echo or turbo spin echo sequences is mandatory for all profoundly deaf children to diagnose CND. Evidence of audition on behavioural or electrophysiological tests following both auditory and electrical stimulation sometimes allows identification of significant auditory tissue not visible on MRI. In particular electric auditory brainstem response (EABR) testing may allow some quantification of auditory tissue and help decide whether a cochlear implant will be beneficial. Age and cognitive development are the most critical factors in determining ABI benefit. Hearing outcomes from both cochlear implants and ABIs are variable and likely to be limited in children with CND. A proportion of children will get no benefit. Usually the implants would be expected to provide recognition of environmental sounds and understanding of simple phonetics. Most children will not develop normal speech and they will often need to learn to communicate with sign language. The ABI involves a major neurosurgical procedure and at present the long term outcomes are unknown. It is therefore essential that parents who are considering this intervention have plenty of time to consider all aspects and the opportunity for in depth discussion.