Background and Objectives: Cholesteatomatous chronic otitis media acquires epithelial proliferation and differentiation characteristics, which render it able to erode the underlying bone and cause complications. We attempt to characterize the cholesteatoma epithelium by observing the expression of cytokeratins (such as 34ße12, CK17, and CK13) and Ki67 among patients with cholesteatoma with different aggressiveness as compared to disease-free controls. Subjects and Methods: In this prospective study (2017-2021), we enrolled all consenting consecutive patients with cholesteatomatous chronic otitis media. They were staged in accordance with the staging guidelines of the European Academy of Otology and Neurotology and the Japanese Otological Society. Bony external auditory canal (EAC) skin specimens of the patients undergoing tympanoplasty were chosen as controls. We did an immunohistochemical analysis of the cholesteatoma specimens and normal bony EAC controls by observing the expression of 34ße12, CK17, CK13, and Ki67 across the layers of the epithelium. Fisher’s exact test and chi-square test were used to evaluate any statistical significance between the cases and the controls, and the subgroups were made based on the clinical stage. Results: An increased expression of CK17 (p<0.001), CK13 (p<0.03), and Ki67 (p<0.001) was observed in cholesteatoma specimens when compared to normal bony EAC controls. Also, there was a loss of expression of 34ße12 in a subset of cholesteatoma specimens, all of which showed full-thickness expression of CK13. There was no difference in the expression of cytokeratin among specimens from patients belonging to different subgroups based on clinical stage, age, sex, duration of ear symptoms, or type of hearing loss (conductive vs. sensorineural). Conclusions The majority of cholesteatoma specimens significantly overexpressed CK17, CK13, and Ki67 when compared to normal bony EAC skin controls, while a subset showed loss of expression of 34ße12, which provides some insight into its pathogenesis.

Background and Objectives: Single-sided deafness (SSD) leads to non-participation of the diseased ear in generating adequate auditory input, which results in poor speech discrimination in noisy surroundings. The present study objectively compared the audiological benefits rendered by contralateral routing of signal (CROS) hearing aid and bone conduction device (BCD) in patients with SSD >70 dB HL using the modified hearing in noise test (HINT). Materials and Methods: Patients with SSD >70 dB HL in poor and clinically normal hearing in the better ear were enrolled. Patients aged <18 or >70 years, with a history of neurological insult or ear infection in the last 3 months, mental retardation, psychiatric or developmental disorders, and diabetes were excluded. Modified HINT was performed with the affected ear unaided, aided with CROS hearing aid, and with BCD, generating three groups. Noise signal was presented at a fixed intensity of 65 dB at the neutral position in the center and speech signal was presented to either ear sequentially. The test was repeated with the speech signal fixed at the neutral position and the noise signal presented to either ear. Results: BCD led to a better signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) than CROS hearing aid in all situations except when noise was centralized and speech was presented to the affected ear. Conclusions A benefit was observed when auditory rehabilitation was used for the affected ear as demonstrated by better SNR scores. The results showed that BCD performed better than CROS hearing aid.

Background and Objectives: Cochlear implantation in late implanted prelinguals necessitates a complex decision-making process for clinicians and patients due to the uncertainty of achieving adequate benefit in auditory and speech perception. This study longitudinally evaluated clinical and social outcomes of prelingually deaf children with implantation in their late childhood. Subjects and Methods: A total of 113 (49 females and 64 males) participants, with an age range of 5-15 years, were assessed for the pre-implant parameters such as hearing loss etiology, aided responses, anatomical aspects, and psychological evaluation. The Category of Auditory Performance, Speech Awareness Threshold, Speech Reception Threshold, and Speech Discrimination Score were administered to assess the patient’s auditory skills. Further, the Speech Intelligibility Rating scale was administered to evaluate the patient’s speech intelligibility at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months post-surgery. Subjectively perceived benefits were evaluated using the satisfaction rating scale and a questionnaire. Results: The statistical results showed a significant impact of cochlear implantation in all domains. Positive impact and improvement post-implantation were noted in all the spheres, including auditory, linguistic, social, and educational. Conclusions The study highlighted that the outcomes of a cochlear implant at a later age might not parallel with the implantation at a younger age. However, this still provides measurable benefits even after a longer period of auditory deprivation.