Cochlear Implantation in Sickle Cell Disease: A Systematic Review of Feasibility and Outcomes.
TL;DR
While CI appears feasible in SCD, the findings suggest that additional data are needed to assess its effectiveness in this patient population, and more comprehensive studies with larger sample size are required.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Sickle cell disease (SCD) is associated with systemic complications, including sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) from microvascular occlusion and chronic inflammation. Although reports link SCD to higher rates of SNHL, current evidence is limited by small sample size, varied audiologic methods, and lack of standardized screening. This systematic review summarizes available literature on SNHL and cochlear implantation (CI) in SCD.
Methods
A literature search of PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL identified 79 citations. After removal of duplicates, 35 records were screened in Rayyan. Studies published between January 1, 2000, and June 30, 2025, were eligible if they reported patients with SCD who developed hearing loss and underwent CI. Nine full texts were reviewed, and 4 met the inclusion criteria. Screening and review were performed independently by 2 authors per PRISMA guidelines.
Results
Across 4 case reports, a total of 5 patients with SCD underwent CI, ranging in age from 2 to 42 years. Four presented with bilateral severe-to-profound SNHL and one with unilateral loss. Implantation was technically feasible in all cases, including patients with cochlear fibrosis or ossification requiring modified insertion techniques. Postoperative outcomes were favorable: all patients demonstrated reliable device function and low impedances. Only 60% showed meaningful auditory benefit, characterized by improved functional speech perception in 2 patients (40%) and access to the speech frequency range with hearing testing going from moderate/profound hearing loss to mild hearing loss in 3 patients (60%). Complications occurred in 2 patients (40%): one developed unilateral middle ear infection leading to meningitis, and another experienced a postoperative pulmonary embolism requiring anticoagulation. The remaining 3 patients (60%) had uncomplicated recoveries with reported improved hearing from moderate/profound hearing loss to mild hearing loss post implantation.
Conclusion
While CI appears feasible in SCD, our findings suggest that additional data are needed to assess its effectiveness in this patient population. However, evidence is limited to case reports, and complications such as thromboembolism and rapid cochlear fibrosis highlight the need for close perioperative management. More comprehensive studies with larger sample size are required to define surgical risk, optimize management, and establish best practices for timely implantation in this population.