Outcomes for a clinically representative cohort of hearing-impaired adults using the Nucleus® CI532 cochlear implant

Improving quality of life in the elderly: hearing loss treatment with cochlear implants

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss impacts health-related quality of life and general well-being and was identified in a Lancet report as one of the largest potentially modifiable factors for the prevention of age-related dementia. There is a lack of robust data on how cochlear implant treatment in the elderly impacts quality of life. The primary objective was to measure the change in health utility following cochlear implantation in individuals aged ≥ 60 years.

METHODS

This study uniquely prospectively recruited a large multinational sample of 100 older adults (mean age 71.7 (SD7.6) range 60-91 years) with severe to profound hearing loss. In a repeated-measures design, pre and post implant outcome measures were analysed using mixed-effect models. Health utility was assessed with the Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI3). Subjects were divided into groups of 60-64, 65-74 and 75 + years.

RESULTS

At 18 months post implant, the mean HUI3 score improved by 0.13 (95%CI: 0.07-0.18 p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the HUI3 between age groups (F[2,9228] = 0.53, p = 0.59). The De Jong Loneliness scale reduced by an average of 0.61 (95%CI: 0.25-0.97 p < 0.014) and the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale improved on average (1.25, 95%CI: 0.85-1.65 p < 0.001). Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly Screening reduced by an average of 8.7 (95%CI: 6.7-10.8, p < 0.001) from a significant to mild-moderate hearing handicap. Age was not a statistically significant factor for any of the other measures (p > 0.20). At baseline 90% of participants had no or mild depression and there was no change in mean depression scores after implant. Categories of Auditory perception scale showed that all subjects achieved a level of speech sound discrimination without lip reading post implantation (level 4) and at least 50% could use the telephone with a known speaker.

CONCLUSIONS

Better hearing improved individuals' quality of life, ability to communicate verbally and their ability to function independently. They felt less lonely and less handicapped by their hearing loss. Benefits were independent of age group. Cochlear implants should be considered as a routine treatment option for those over 60 years with bilateral severe to profound hearing loss.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ( http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ ), 7 March 2017, NCT03072862.

Variability in Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in a Large German Cohort With a Genetic Etiology of Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVES

The variability in outcomes of cochlear implantation is largely unexplained, and clinical factors are not sufficient for predicting performance. Genetic factors have been suggested to impact outcomes, but the clinical and genetic heterogeneity of hereditary hearing loss makes it difficult to determine and interpret postoperative performance. It is hypothesized that genetic mutations that affect the neuronal components of the cochlea and auditory pathway, targeted by the cochlear implant (CI), may lead to poor performance. A large cohort of CI recipients was studied to verify this hypothesis.

DESIGN

This study included a large German cohort of CI recipients (n = 123 implanted ears; n = 76 probands) with a definitive genetic etiology of hearing loss according to the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG)/Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guidelines and documented postoperative audiological outcomes. All patients underwent preoperative clinical and audiological examinations. Postoperative CI outcome measures were based on at least 1 year of postoperative audiological follow-up for patients with postlingual hearing loss onset (>6 years) and 5 years for children with congenital or pre/perilingual hearing loss onset (≤6 years). Genetic analysis was performed based on three different methods that included single-gene screening, custom-designed hearing loss gene panel sequencing, targeting known syndromic and nonsyndromic hearing loss genes, and whole-genome sequencing.

RESULTS

The genetic diagnosis of the 76 probands in the genetic cohort involved 35 genes and 61 different clinically relevant (pathogenic, likely pathogenic) variants. With regard to implanted ears (n = 123), the six most frequently affected genes affecting nearly one-half of implanted ears were GJB2 (21%; n = 26), TMPRSS3 (7%; n = 9), MYO15A (7%; n = 8), SLC26A4 (5%; n = 6), and LOXHD1 and USH2A (each 4%; n = 5). CI recipients with pathogenic variants that influence the sensory nonneural structures performed at or above the median level of speech performance of all ears at 70% [monosyllable word recognition score in quiet at 65 decibels sound pressure level (SPL)]. When gene expression categories were compared to demographic and clinical categories (total number of compared categories: n = 30), mutations in genes expressed in the spiral ganglion emerged as a significant factor more negatively affecting cochlear implantation outcomes than all clinical parameters. An ANOVA of a reduced set of genetic and clinical categories (n = 10) identified five detrimental factors leading to poorer performance with highly significant effects ( p < 0.001), accounting for a total of 11.8% of the observed variance. The single strongest category was neural gene expression accounting for 3.1% of the variance.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of the relationship between the molecular genetic diagnoses of a hereditary etiology of hearing loss and cochlear implantation outcomes in a large German cohort of CI recipients revealed significant variabilities. Poor performance was observed with genetic mutations that affected the neural components of the cochlea, supporting the "spiral ganglion hypothesis."

The Relationship Between Cochlear Implant Speech Perception Outcomes and Electrophysiological Measures of the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the relationship between electrophysiological measures of the electrically evoked compound action potential (eCAP) and speech perception scores measured in quiet and in noise in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant (CI) users. It tested the hypothesis that how well the auditory nerve (AN) responds to electrical stimulation is important for speech perception with a CI in challenging listening conditions.

DESIGN

Study participants included 24 postlingually deafened adult CI users. All participants used Cochlear Nucleus CIs in their test ears. In each participant, eCAPs were measured at multiple electrode locations in response to single-pulse, paired-pulse, and pulse-train stimuli. Independent variables included six metrics calculated from the eCAP recordings: the electrode-neuron interface (ENI) index, the neural adaptation (NA) ratio, NA speed, the adaptation recovery (AR) ratio, AR speed, and the amplitude modulation (AM) ratio. The ENI index quantified the effectiveness of the CI electrodes in stimulating the targeted AN fibers. The NA ratio indicated the amount of NA at the AN caused by a train of constant-amplitude pulses. NA speed was defined as the speed/rate of NA. The AR ratio estimated the amount of recovery from NA at a fixed time point after the cessation of pulse-train stimulation. AR speed referred to the speed of recovery from NA caused by previous pulse-train stimulation. The AM ratio provided a measure of AN sensitivity to AM cues. Participants' speech perception scores were measured using Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word lists and AzBio sentences presented in quiet, as well as in noise at signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) of +10 and +5 dB. Predictive models were created for each speech measure to identify eCAP metrics with meaningful predictive power.

RESULTS

The ENI index and AR speed individually explained at least 10% of the variance in most of the speech perception scores measured in this study, while the NA ratio, NA speed, the AR ratio, and the AM ratio did not. The ENI index was identified as the only eCAP metric that had unique predictive power for each of the speech test results. The amount of variance in speech perception scores (both CNC words and AzBio sentences) explained by the eCAP metrics increased with increased difficulty under the listening condition. Over half of the variance in speech perception scores measured in +5 dB SNR noise (both CNC words and AzBio sentences) was explained by a model with only three eCAP metrics: the ENI index, NA speed, and AR speed.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the six electrophysiological measures assessed in this study, the ENI index is the most informative predictor for speech perception performance in CI users. In agreement with the tested hypothesis, the response characteristics of the AN to electrical stimulation are more important for speech perception with a CI in noise than they are in quiet.

Electrically evoked compound action potentials in cochlear implant users with preoperative residual hearing

Introduction

Residual hearing in cochlear implant (CI) candidates requires the functional integrity of the nerve in particular regions of the cochlea. Nerve activity can be elicited as electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAP) after cochlear implantation. We hypothesize that ECAP thresholds depend on preoperative residual hearing ability.

Materials and methods

In a retrospective study, we analyzed 84 adult cochlear implant users who had received a Nucleus® CI632 Slim Modiolar Electrode and who preoperatively had had residual hearing. Inclusion criteria were severe to profound hearing loss with preoperative measurable hearing in the ear to receive the implant, postlingual hearing loss, German as native language and correct placement of the electrode, inserted completely into the scala tympani. Electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) was recorded intraoperatively. The angular insertion was measured for each electrode contact from postoperative computed tomography to estimate the corresponding spiral ganglion frequency. Pure-tone audiometry and allocated ECAP thresholds were tested to investigate possible correlation.

Results

The average of hearing thresholds, tested at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz (4FPTA) was 82 ± 18 (range 47-129) dB HL. The success rate for recording ECAP thresholds was 96.9%. For all comparable pure-tone frequencies (1, 2, 4, and 8 kHz), there was significant correlation between preoperative hearing levels and intraoperative ECAP thresholds (p < 0.001). Higher hearing thresholds are associated with increased ECAP thresholds.

Conclusion

In CI candidates with adequate residual hearing, intraoperative electrophysiological measurement records lower thresholds. This outcome may be explained by the neural survival density of the peripheral system, with less neural degeneration.

Residual low-frequency hearing after early device activation in cochlear implantation

PURPOSE

The cochlear implant (CI) is a standard treatment for patients with severe to profound hearing loss. In recent years, early device activation of the sound processor after 2-3 days following surgery has been established. The aim of this study is to evaluate the residual hearing of CI patients with substantial preoperative low-frequency hearing after early device activation over a period of 12 months.

METHODS

Results were compared between an early fitted group (EF) with device activation to less than 15 days after CI surgery and a control group (CG) with device activation after 3-6 weeks. In total, 57 patients were divided into EF group (n = 32), and CG (n = 25). Low-frequency residual hearing and speech recognition in quiet and in noise were compared over an observation period of 12 months.

RESULTS

No significant difference (p > 0.05) in the residual low-frequency hearing PTAlow between EF and CG was found, neither preoperatively (EF 33.2 dB HL/CG 35.0 dB HL), nor postoperatively (EF 46.8 dB HL/CG 46.2 dB HL). In both groups, postoperative residual hearing decreased compared to preoperative and remained stable within the first year after CI surgery. Furthermore, both groups showed no significant differences (p > 0.05) in speech recognition in quiet and in noise within the first year.

CONCLUSION

Early device activation is feasible in CI patients with preoperative low-frequency residual hearing, without an additional effect on postoperative hearing preservation.

Extended Preoperative Audiometry for Outcome Prediction and Risk Analysis in Patients Receiving Cochlear Implants

BACKGROUND

The outcome of cochlear implantation has improved over the last decades, but there are still patients with less benefit. Despite numerous studies examining the cochlear implant (CI) outcome, variations in speech comprehension with CI remains incompletely explained. The aim of this study was therefore to examine preoperative pure-tone audiogram and speech comprehension as well as aetiology, to investigate their relationship with postoperative speech comprehension in CI recipients.

METHODS

A retrospective study with 664 ears of 530 adult patients was conducted. Correlations between the target variable postoperative word comprehension with the preoperative speech and sound comprehension as well as aetiology were investigated. Significant correlations were inserted into multivariate models. Speech comprehension measured as word recognition score at 70 dB with CI was analyzed as (i) a continuous and (ii) a dichotomous variable.

RESULTS

All variables that tested preoperative hearing were significantly correlated with the dichotomous target; with the continuous target, all except word comprehension at 65 dB with hearing aid. The strongest correlation with postoperative speech comprehension was seen for monosyllabic words with hearing aid at 80 dB. The preoperative maximum word comprehension was reached or surpassed by 97.3% of CI patients. Meningitis and congenital diseases were strongly negatively associated with postoperative word comprehension. The multivariate model was able to explain 40% of postoperative variability.

CONCLUSION

Speech comprehension with hearing aid at 80 dB can be used as a supplementary preoperative indicator of CI-aided speech comprehension and should be measured regularly in the clinical routine. Combining audiological and aetiological variables provides more insights into the variability of the CI outcome, allowing for better patient counselling.

An optically-guided cochlear implant sheath for real-time monitoring of electrode insertion into the human cochlea

In cochlear implant surgery, insertion of perimodiolar electrode arrays into the scala tympani can be complicated by trauma or even accidental translocation of the electrode array within the cochlea. In patients with partial hearing loss, cochlear trauma can not only negatively affect implant performance, but also reduce residual hearing function. These events have been related to suboptimal positioning of the cochlear implant electrode array with respect to critical cochlear walls of the scala tympani (modiolar wall, osseous spiral lamina and basilar membrane). Currently, the position of the electrode array in relation to these walls cannot be assessed during the insertion and the surgeon depends on tactile feedback, which is unreliable and often comes too late. This study presents an image-guided cochlear implant device with an integrated, fiber-optic imaging probe that provides real-time feedback using optical coherence tomography during insertion into the human cochlea. This novel device enables the surgeon to accurately detect and identify the cochlear walls ahead and to adjust the insertion trajectory, avoiding collision and trauma. The functionality of this prototype has been demonstrated in a series of insertion experiments, conducted by experienced cochlear implant surgeons on fresh-frozen human cadaveric cochleae.

Natural course of residual hearing preservation with a slim, modiolar cochlear implant electrode array

PURPOSE

Understanding residual hearing preservation and its natural course following cochlear implantation is important for developing rehabilitation strategies for hearing loss. However, non-uniform evaluation criteria and varying surgical skills pose challenges in fair comparison of the effect of different electrodes on residual hearing preservation. We compared the effect of a slim modiolar electrode (SME) and a slim straight electrode (SSE), implanted by a single surgeon, on progression of residual hearing using different parameters, based on cross-sectional and longitudinal audiological analyses.

METHODS

Patients with preoperative low-frequency pure-tone average (LFPTA) ≤85 dB at 250 and 500 Hz and who underwent minimally traumatic surgical techniques were included. The progression of residual hearing using threshold shifts, hearing preservation rate according to the HEARRING classification, and maintenance of functional low-frequency hearing potentially qualifying for a hybrid stimulation was analyzed up to five time points throughout the 1-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

Threshold shifts and hearing preservation rates according to the HEARRING classification of the electrodes were comparable from 3 months through 12 months postoperatively. Maintenance of functional low-frequency hearing, required for the usage of a hybrid stimulation, was similar for both electrodes. A substantial proportion of implantees with SME use a hybrid stimulation, resulting in long-term use. However, a difference in the pattern of postoperative residual hearing preservation between the two electrodes is possible, probably due to differences in their physical characteristics and location. Specifically, correlation analysis exhibited that significantly less tight modiolar proximity negatively affect the residual hearing preservation, albeit only at 3 months postoperatively, among patients with the SME.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, both SME and SSE implantation showed favorable residual hearing preservation. Our findings further refine the recently proposed hearing preservation with the SME and suggest that the physical characteristics and location of electrodes, in terms of electrode-to-modiolus distance, could affect loss of acoustic hearing in various ways.

Comparing the Speech Perception of Cochlear Implant Users with Three Different Finnish Speech Intelligibility Tests in Noise

Background: A large number of different speech-in-noise (SIN) tests are available for testing cochlear implant (CI) recipients, but few studies have compared the different tests in the same patient population to assess how well their results correlate. Methods: A clinically representative group of 80 CI users conducted the Finnish versions of the matrix sentence test, the simplified matrix sentence test, and the digit triplet test. The results were analyzed for correlations between the different tests and for differences among the participants, including age and device modality. Results: Strong and statistically significant correlations were observed between all of the tests. No floor or ceiling effects were observed with any of the tests when using the adaptive test procedure. Age or the length of device use showed no correlation to SIN perception, but bilateral CI users showed slightly better results in comparison to unilateral or bimodal users. Conclusions: Three SIN tests that differ in length and complexity of the test material provided comparable results in a diverse CI user group.

The Listening Network and Cochlear Implant Benefits in Hearing-Impaired Adults

Older adults with mild or no hearing loss make more errors and expend more effort listening to speech. Cochlear implants (CI) restore hearing to deaf patients but with limited fidelity. We hypothesized that patient-reported hearing and health-related quality of life in CI patients may similarly vary according to age. Speech Spatial Qualities (SSQ) of hearing scale and Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI) questionnaires were administered to 543 unilaterally implanted adults across Europe, South Africa, and South America. Data were acquired before surgery and at 1, 2, and 3 years post-surgery. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models with visit, age group (18–34, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, and 65+), and side of implant as main factors and adjusted for other covariates. Tinnitus and dizziness prevalence did not vary with age, but older groups had more preoperative hearing. Preoperatively and postoperatively, SSQ scores were significantly higher (Δ0.75–0.82) for those aged <45 compared with those 55+. However, gains in SSQ scores were equivalent across age groups, although postoperative SSQ scores were higher in right-ear implanted subjects. All age groups benefited equally in terms of HUI gain (0.18), with no decrease in scores with age. Overall, younger adults appeared to cope better with a degraded hearing before and after CI, leading to better subjective hearing performance.

Longitudinal outcomes of cochlear implantation and bimodal hearing in a large group of adults: A multicenter clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate speech understanding outcomes in a large adult cohort who demonstrated poor hearing performance with well fit hearing aids in the unilateral and bilateral or bimodal listening conditions at preimplant, 3-, 6- and 12-months.

SUBJECTS

Post-linguistically deafened adults (N = 100) with bilateral moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss and limited functional benefit from well fit bilateral hearing aids.

METHOD

A multicenter, prospective, repeated-measures, within-subject controlled study was conducted. All subjects were implanted with a Slim Modiolar cochlear implant and were required to use bimodal stimulation (cochlear implant and hearing aid in contralateral ear) for 6-months postimplant and optionally to 12-months. Evaluations included: speech recognition for monosyllabic consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) words in quiet; AzBio sentences in coincident noise (at +5 and +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)), in implant ear and bimodal conditions. All speech tests were performed at preimplant and 6-months postimplant for primary endpoint outcomes, and a subset of speech tests at 3- and 12-months.

RESULTS

In the implant ear only, at 3-, 6- and 12-months postimplant, 84%, 93% and 97% of subjects respectively, demonstrated significantly improved monosyllabic word scores in quiet compared to preimplant hearing aid scores (p < 0.05). At 12-months, a mean gain of 51% points, for monosyllabic words and 32% points for sentences in noise was observed (p < 0.001). In the bimodal condition, at 6-months postimplant, 87% of subjects demonstrated significantly improved monosyllabic word scores in quiet compared to preimplant bilateral hearing aid scores (p < 0.05). At 6-months, a mean gain of 40% points, for monosyllabic words was observed (p < 0.001). Speech scores for sentences in noise significantly improved for the bimodal condition at 6- and 12-months (p < 0.001). In addition to speech scores for the implanted ear, bimodal condition scores demonstrated further increments, especially for sentences in noise at 6- and 12-months (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Results support that bimodal hearing is superior to bilateral hearing aids in this cohort of bilateral moderate-to-profound adult hearing aid users. Our study cohort demonstrated significant improvements for speech scores for the cochlear implant (CI) ear only and bimodal conditions compared to the baseline preimplant unilateral and bilateral hearing aid conditions respectively. The greatest gain in performance was in the first three months of device use with incremental improvement through 12 months. These findings indicate that when hearing aids fit to National Acoustics Laboratory (NAL-1) targets do not provide the necessary audibility needed for speech recognition, referral for CI-candidacy evaluation is strongly recommended.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clintrial.govNCT03007472. Registered 01/02/2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03007472?term=clinical+evaluation+of+the+nucleus+CI532&draw=2&rank=2.