Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Bilateral cochlear implantation in infantile Bartter’s syndrome
  1. Lekhaa Mohanraj1 and
  2. Prasanna Kumar Saravanam2
  1. 1Otorhinolaryngology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  2. 2ENT, Head and Neck Surgery, Sri Ramachandra University Medical College, Chennai, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Prasanna Kumar Saravanam; sprasannakumar10{at}


Bartter’s syndrome (BS) is a rare group of hereditary salt losing tubulopathies due to impairment of renal transport mechanism. Herein, we report a boy in early childhood who was diagnosed to have infantile Bartter’s syndrome. Laboratory investigations revealed hypokalaemia and metabolic alkalosis which was managed with oral potassium chloride supplementation. The inner ear showed no anatomical abnormalities. Sequential cochlear implantation was performed 4 months apart. Postoperative electrical stimulation yielded good response and a symmetric mapping. The patient was on regular audio-verbal therapy. Cognitive impairment improved over time. Bilateral cochlear implantation showed excellent auditory outcomes.

  • paediatrics
  • ear, nose and throat/otolaryngology

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors Dr LM participated in acquisition of data and drafting of the article. Prof Major PKS performed critical revision and final drafting of the article. Both authors approve the final version to be published.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.