Bilateral cochlear implantation or bimodal listening in the paediatric population: Retrospective analysis of decisive criteria

In an era of bilateral funding and changing criteria, when is unilateral cochlear implantation a better option?

BACKGROUND

Funding for paediatric bilateral cochlear implantation became available in Ireland in 2014. Prior to this, children eligible for cochlear implantation received a unilateral implant.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the cohort of children who received a unilateral cochlear implant in the 4 year period following bilateral cochlear implantation funding becoming available.

METHODS

A clinical audit of all children implanted for the first time between July 2014 and July 2018. The unilaterally implanted children (n = 105) were divided into 3 groups according to whether they met the audiometric thresholds for implantation in neither ear (Group 1), one ear (Group 2) or both ears (Group 3). One year post operative functional outcomes were examined for all 3 groups.

RESULTS

All 3 groups showed significant improvements in functional outcomes at 1 year post op. To date, 20% of the unilaterally implanted children have proceeded to get a sequential CI, often where there was no change in audiological status.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of children in Groups 1 and 2 highlighted how our decision making around cochlear implantation has changed in recent years. Unilateral cochlear implantation in certain circumstances is good practice, independent of the audiological profile when an experienced multi-disciplinary team (MDT) is involved in the decision making process. Decision making using a holistic model approach is key, including involving the parent/carer and, where appropriate, the child/teenager themselves. A staged bilateral cochlear implant is also a good option, where careful monitoring and support for the first implant has resulted in positive outcomes.

Spatial Release From Masking in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients With Single-Sided Deafness

Purpose Children with single-sided deafness (SSD) experience difficulty understanding speech in multisource listening situations. Case reports and retrospective studies have indicated that a cochlear implant (CI) may improve masked speech recognition in children with SSD. This prospective study was conducted to determine whether providing a CI to children with SSD supports spatial release from masking (SRM), an improvement in speech recognition associated with separating the target and masker sources. Method Twenty children with at least a moderate-to-profound hearing loss in one ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear underwent cochlear implantation. The average age of implantation was 5.5 years (range: 3.5-12.7). After 12 months of CI use, subjects completed a sentence recognition task in multitalker masker with and without the CI. The target was presented from the front, and the masker was either colocated with the target (0°) or from the side (+90° or -90°). A two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was completed to investigate SRM with and without the CI. Results Pediatric CI recipients experienced significant SRM when the masker was directed to the normal-hearing ear or to the affected ear. Conclusions The results indicate that cochlear implantation in children with SSD supports binaural skills required for speech recognition in noise. These results are consistent with improved functional communication in multisource environments, like classrooms.

Bilateral Cochlear Implants or Bimodal Hearing for Children with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Purpose of review

This review describes speech perception and language outcomes for children using bimodal hearing (cochlear implant (CI) plus contralateral hearing aid) as compared to children with bilateral CIs and contrasts said findings with the adult literature. There is a lack of clinical evidence driving recommendations for bimodal versus bilateral CI candidacy and as such, clinicians are often unsure about when to recommend a second CI for children with residual acoustic hearing. Thus the goal of this review is to identify scientific information that may influence clinical decision making for pediatric CI candidates with residual acoustic hearing.

Recent findings

Bilateral CIs are considered standard of care for children with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. For children with aidable acoustic hearing-even in just the low frequencies-an early period of bimodal stimulation has been associated with significantly better speech perception, vocabulary, and language development. HA audibility, however, is generally poorer than that offered by a CI resulting in interaural asymmetry in speech perception, head shadow, as well as brainstem and cortical activity and development. Thus there is a need to optimize "two-eared" hearing while maximizing a child's potential with respect to hearing, speech, and language while ensuring that we limit asymmetrically driven auditory neuroplasticity. A recent large study of bimodal and bilateral CI users suggested that a period of bimodal stimulation was only beneficial for children with a better-ear pure tone average (PTA) ≤ 73 dB HL. This 73-dB-HL cutoff applied even to children who ultimately received bilateral CIs.

Summary

Though we do not yet have definitive guidelines for determining bimodal versus bilateral CI candidacy, there is increasing evidence that 1) bilateral CIs yield superior outcomes for children with bilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss and, 2) an early period of bimodal stimulation is beneficial for speech perception and language development, but only for children with better-ear PTA ≤ 73 dB HL. For children with residual acoustic hearing, even in just the low-frequency range, rapid sequential bilateral cochlear implantation following a trial period with bimodal stimulation will yield best outcomes for auditory, language, and academic development. Of course, there is also an increasing prevalence of cochlear implantation with acoustic hearing preservation allowing for combined electric and acoustic stimulation even following bilateral implantation.

Spatial Release From Masking in Bimodal and Bilateral Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients

Purpose Traditional clinical measures of cochlear implant (CI) recipient performance may not fully evaluate the benefit of bimodal listening (hearing aid contralateral to a CI). The clinical assessment of spatial release from masking (SRM) may be a sensitive measure of the benefit of listening with bimodal stimulation. This study compared the SRM of pediatric bimodal and bilateral CI listeners using a clinically feasible method, and investigated variables that may contribute to speech recognition performance with spatially separated maskers. Method Forty pediatric bimodal (N = 20) and bilateral CI (N = 20) participants were assessed in their best aided listening condition on sentence recognition in a four-talker masker. Testing was completed with target and masker colocated at 0° azimuth, and with the masker directed at 90° to either ear. SRM was calculated as the difference in performance between the colocated and each 90° condition. A two-way mixed-methods analysis of variance was used to compare performance between groups in the three masker conditions. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to investigate potential predictors for SRM asymmetry including hearing history, unaided thresholds, word recognition, duration of device use, and acoustic bandwidth. Results Both groups demonstrated SRM, with significantly better recognition in each 90° condition as compared to the colocated condition. The groups did not differ significantly in SRM. The multiple regression analyses did not reveal any significant predictors of SRM asymmetry. Conclusions Bimodal and bilateral CI listeners demonstrated similar amounts of SRM. While no specific variables predicted SRM asymmetry in bimodal listeners, pediatric bimodal and bilateral CI recipients should expect similar amounts of SRM regardless of the side of the masker. SRM asymmetry in pediatric bimodal listeners may signal a need for consideration of a second CI.

Effects of Early Acoustic Hearing on Speech Perception and Language for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients

Purpose The overall goal of the current study was to identify an optimal level and duration of acoustic experience that facilitates language development for pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients-specifically, to determine whether there is an optimal duration of hearing aid (HA) use and unaided threshold levels that should be considered before proceeding to bilateral CIs. Method A total of 117 pediatric CI recipients (ages 5-9 years) were given speech perception and standardized tests of receptive vocabulary and language. The speech perception battery included tests of segmental perception (e.g., word recognition in quiet and noise, and vowels and consonants in quiet) and of suprasegmental perception (e.g., talker and stress discrimination, and emotion identification). Hierarchical regression analyses were used to determine the effects of speech perception on language scores, and the effects of residual hearing level (unaided pure-tone average [PTA]) and duration of HA use on speech perception. Results A continuum of residual hearing levels and the length of HA use were represented by calculating the unaided PTA of the ear with the longest duration of HA use for each child. All children wore 2 devices: Some wore bimodal devices, while others received their 2nd CI either simultaneously or sequentially, representing a wide range of HA use (0.03-9.05 years). Regression analyses indicate that suprasegmental perception contributes unique variance to receptive language scores and that both segmental and suprasegmental skills each contribute independently to receptive vocabulary scores. Also, analyses revealed an optimal duration of HA use for each of 3 ranges of hearing loss severity (with mean PTAs of 73, 92, and 111 dB HL) that maximizes suprasegmental perception. Conclusions For children with the most profound losses, early bilateral CIs provide the greatest opportunity for developing good spoken language skills. For those with moderate-to-severe losses, however, a prescribed period of bimodal use may be more advantageous for developing good spoken language skills.

Bilateral cochlear implantation is regarded as very beneficial: results from a worldwide survey by online questionnaire

PURPOSE

Bilateral cochlear implant (CI) provision is now widely regarded as the most beneficial hearing intervention for acceptable candidates. This study sought to determine if a number of well-regarded hearing professionals at highly reputable clinics shared similar practices and beliefs regarding bilateral CI provision, use, and rehabilitation in children and adults.

METHODS

An 11-question online questionnaire was created and distributed to all 27 clinics in the HEARRING group. Questions 1-5 asked for facts; questions 6-11 asked for opinions.

RESULTS

20 completed questionnaires were returned. All 20 respondents reported that their clinics perform bilateral cochlear implantation in children; 18 do so in adults. Regarding the fact-based questions, bilateral CI provision is more commonly performed and more likely to be reimbursed in children than in adults. Children are also much more likely to be implanted simultaneously than are adults. Regarding the opinion-based questions, respondents gave broadly similar answers. Communication between the CIs and speech coding strategies specifically developed for bilateral CI users were regarded as the two future technologies that would most enhance the benefit of bilateral CI use.

CONCLUSIONS

Most clinics in the HEARRING group are very familiar with bilateral CI provision and hold similar opinions on its results and benefits. Hopefully the results described herein will lead to a greater acceptance and regular reimbursement of bilateral CI provision, especially in adults.