Cochlear Implantation in Cases of Unilateral Hearing Loss: Initial Localization Abilities

Adaptive Strategies of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear-Implant Users Revealed Through Resting State Activity: an Auditory PET Brain Imaging Study

Brain plasticity refers to the brain's ability to reorganize its structure or function in response to experiences, learning, and environmental influences. This phenomenon is particularly significant in individuals with deafness, as the brain adapts to compensate for the lack of auditory stimulation. The aim of this study is to investigate whether cochlear implantation can restore a normal pattern of brain activation following auditory stimulation in cases of asymmetric hearing loss. We used a PET-scan technique to assess brain activity after cochlear implantation, specifically during an auditory voice/non-voice discrimination task. The results indicated a nearly normal pattern of brain activity during the auditory discrimination task, except for increased activation in areas related to attentional processes compared to controls. Additionally, brain activity at rest showed significant changes in implanted participants, including cross modal visuo-auditory processing. Therefore, cochlear implants can restore the brain's activation pattern through long-term adaptive adjustments in intrinsic brain activity.

A Consensus to Revise the Minimum Speech Test Battery-Version 3

PURPOSE

The Minimum Speech Test Battery (MSTB) for adults was introduced in 1996 (Nilsson et al., 1996) and subsequently updated in 2011 (Advanced-Bionics et al., 2011). The MSTB has been widely used by clinicians as a guide for cochlear implant (CI) candidacy evaluations and to document post-operative speech recognition performance. Due to changes in candidacy over the past 10 years, a revision to the MSTB was needed.

METHOD

In 2022, the Institute for Cochlear Implant Training (ICIT) recruited a panel of expert CI audiologists to update and revise the MSTB. This panel utilized a modified Delphi consensus process to revise the test battery and to improve its applicability considering recent changes in CI care.

RESULTS

This resulted in the MTSB-Version 3 (MSTB-3), which includes test protocols for identifying not only traditional CI candidates but also possible candidates for electric-acoustic stimulation and patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. The MSTB-3 provides information that supplements the earlier versions of the MSTB, such as recommendations of when to refer patients for a CI, recommended patient-reported outcome measures, considerations regarding the use of cognitive screeners, and sample report templates for clinical documentation of pre- and post-operative care. Electronic versions of test stimuli, along with all the materials described above, will be available to clinicians via the ICIT website (https://www.cochlearimplanttraining.com).

CONCLUSION

The goal of the MSTB-3 is to be an evidence-based test battery that will facilitate a streamlined standard of care for adult CI candidates and recipients that will be widely used by CI clinicians.

Investigating the Utility of a Compact Loudspeaker Array for Audiometric Testing

PURPOSE

This project addressed the uses of a loudspeaker array for audiometric measurements. It sought to evaluate a prototype compact array in terms of the reliability of test results across sound booths.

METHOD

A seven-loudspeaker array was developed to deliver sounds from -60° to +60° on an arc with a radius of 0.5 m. The system was equipped with a head position sensing system to maintain the listener's head near the optimal test position. Three array systems were distributed to each of the two test sites for within-subject assessments of booth equivalence on tests of sound localization, speech reception in noise, and threshold detection. A total of 36 subjects participated, 18 at each test site.

RESULTS

Results showed excellent interbooth consistency on tests of sound localization using speech and noise signals, including conditions in which one or both ears were covered with a muff. Booth consistency was also excellent on sound field threshold measurements for detecting quasi-diffuse noise bands. Nonequivalence was observed in some cases of speech-in-noise tests, particularly with a small one-person booth. Acoustic analyses of in situ loudspeaker responses indicated that some of the nonequivalent comparisons on speech-in-noise tests could be traced to the effects of reflections.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results demonstrate the utility and reliability of a compact array for the assessment of localization ability, speech reception in noise, and sound field thresholds. However, the results indicate that researchers and clinicians should be aware of the reflection effects that can influence the results of sound field tests in which signal and noise levels from separate loudspeakers are critical.

Changing Management of Intravestibular Schwannomas in the Era of Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVE

Intralabyrinthine schwannomas (ILSs) are a rare cause of deafness. Patients with ILS confined to the semicircular canals and the vestibule (intravestibular schwannomas) are potential candidates for cochlear implantation for hearing rehabilitation, a new option for patients with unilateral hearing loss since the 2019 FDA approval of cochlear implant (CI) for single-sided deafness. In this report, we describe an evolving management approach for ILSs causing hearing loss.

PATIENTS

Adults (≥18 years) who underwent simultaneous ILS resection and CI between January 2019 and June 2023 (n = 3).

INTERVENTION

Transmastoid labyrinthectomy with simultaneous cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Hearing performance with cochlear implantation measured as CNC Word Recognition scores and AzBio Sentence scores.

RESULTS

Three patients with ILS confined to the semicircular canals and vestibule underwent simultaneous tumor resection via labyrinthectomy with CI placement. In all cases, complete tumor resection and full CI insertion were achieved. No patients experienced postoperative complications. Patients 1 and 2 underwent 6- and 9-month postactivation testing, respectively, with CNC scores 64% to 80% and AzBio 81% to 99% in the implanted ears. Patient 3 scored 0% on CNC and AzBio testing at 3 months and deferred her 6-month audiometry.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ILS confined to the vestibule and semicircular canals can be considered for simultaneous tumor resection and CI placement.

Objective and subjective efficacy of hearing aids in patients with mild-to-moderate unilateral hearing loss: a prospective study

PURPOSE

In patients with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL), we explored both objective functional audiological gains and subjective satisfaction, indicating when a unilateral hearing aid is valuable.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients with mild-to-moderate USNHL (mean pure-tone thresholds between 25 and 70 dB) were prescribed unilateral hearing aids. Functional gain, the aided speech discrimination score (SDS), the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) score, and the sound localization test score were collected, and a questionnaire (the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly, HHIE) completed after 1, 2, and 3 months of hearing aid use. We classified the participants as having 'no handicap' (HHIE < 17), 'mild-to-moderate handicap' (17-42), and 'significant handicap' (> 42).

RESULTS

The decrease in handicap afforded by unilateral hearing aids was largest in the 'significant handicap' group (the HHIE total score fell from 59.1 to 37.2; P = 0.007). There were no between-group differences in either functional gain or the aided SDS. Only the 'significant handicap' group evidenced an improved HINT score; the composite signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) fell from - 1.5 to - 2.2 dB [S/N] (P = 0.023). The HHIE usefully indicated when a hearing aid alleviated the discomfort of USNHL; patients with unaided HHIE scores ≥ 20 evidenced significant decreases in the composite SNR (- 1.7 to - 2.0 dB [S/N]; P = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

When considering whether to prescribe a unilateral hearing aid for patients with mild-to-moderate USNHL, it is helpful to use the HHIE to evaluate discomfort. If the total score is ≥ 20, a hearing aid is appropriate.

American Cochlear Implant Alliance Task Force: Recommendations for Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults

The indications for cochlear implantation have expanded over time due to evidence demonstrating identification and implantation of appropriate cochlear implant (CI) candidates lead to significant improvements in speech recognition and quality of life (QoL). However, clinical practice is variable, with some providers using outdated criteria and others exceeding current labeled indications. As a results, only a fraction of those persons who could benefit from CI technology receive it. This document summarizes the current evidence for determining appropriate referrals for adults with bilateral hearing loss into CI centers for formal evaluation by stressing the importance of treating each ear individually and a "revised 60/60 rule". By mirroring contemporary clinical practice and available evidence, these recommendations will also provide a standardized testing protocol for CI candidates using a team-based approach that prioritizes individualized patient care. This manuscript was developed by the Adult Cochlear Implantation Candidacy Task Force of the American Cochlear Implant Alliance using review of the existing literature and clinical consensus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:S1-S14, 2024.

Auditory Cortical Plasticity in Patients with Single-Sided Deafness Before and After Cochlear Implantation

PURPOSE

This study investigated neuroplastic changes induced by postlingual single-sided deafness (SSD) and the effects of a cochlear implantation for the deaf ear. Neural processing of acoustic signals from the normal hearing ear to the brain was studied before and after implantation using a positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scanner.

METHODS

Eight patients with postlingual SSD received a cochlear implant (CI) in a prospective clinical trial. Dynamic imaging was performed in a PET/CT scanner using radioactively labeled water ([15O]H2O) to localize changes in the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) with and without an auditory task of logatomes containing speech-like elements without meaningful context. The normal hearing ear was stimulated before implantation and after the use of the cochlear implant for at least 8 months (mean 13.5, range 8.1-26.6). Eight age- and gender-matched subjects with normal hearing on both sides served as healthy control subjects (HCS).

RESULTS

When the normal hearing ear of SSD patients was stimulated before CI implantation, the [15O]H2O-PET showed a more symmetrical rCBF in the auditory regions of both hemispheres in comparison to the HCS. The use of CI increased the asymmetry index (AI) in six of eight patients indicating an increase of activity of the contralateral hemisphere. Non-parametric statistics revealed a significant difference in the AI between patients before CI implantation and HCS (p < .01), which disappeared after CI implantation (p = .195).

CONCLUSION

The functional neuroimaging data showed a tendency towards normalization of neuronal activity after CI implantation, which supports the effectiveness of CI in SSD patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01749592, December 13, 2012.

Prevalence of Age-Related Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Related Factors in Elderly Patients Attending Tertiary Hospital in Tanzania

PURPOSE

Age-related sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), is a progressive, usually bilateral hearing loss that occurs in elderly. It is correctable using rehabilitative hearing devices, which can vastly improve the older person's quality of life. This study aimed to find out the prevalence and related factors of age-related sensorineural hearing loss among elderly patients in Tanzania.

METHODS

A total of 380 elderly patients who received Otorhinolaryngology (ORL) services at Muhimbili tertiary hospital were enrolled. Participants were screened for hearing loss and interviewed by the structured questionnaire followed by otoscopic examination and Pure tone Audiometry (PTA).

RESULTS

This study included 182(47.9%) males, and 198 (52.1%) females. The prevalence of SNHL was 27.6%, males were mostly affected 57(31.3%) p = 0.574. Bilateral SNHL was found 90 (85.7%) p = 0.026, and the severity of age-related SNHL was found to increase as age increases.

CONCLUSION

Sensorineural hearing loss among the elderly was prevalent, mostly bilateral, and the severity increases with age. Confounding factors such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM), cigarette smoking, and ototoxic medication may have contributed. Elderly should be screened for hearing loss especially on the individuals with other co-morbidities for early diagnosis and management in order to improve the quality of life of the elderly.

Two-Year Outcomes of Cochlear Implant Use for Children With Unilateral Hearing Loss: Benefits and Comparison to Children With Normal Hearing

OBJECTIVES

Children with severe-to-profound unilateral hearing loss, including cases of single-sided deafness (SSD), lack access to binaural cues that support spatial hearing, such as recognizing speech in complex multisource environments and sound source localization. Listening in a monaural condition negatively impacts communication, learning, and quality of life for children with SSD. Cochlear implant (CI) use may restore binaural hearing abilities and improve outcomes as compared to alternative treatments or no treatment. This study investigated performance over 24 months of CI use in young children with SSD as compared to the better hearing ear alone and to children with bilateral normal hearing (NH).

DESIGN

Eighteen children with SSD who received a CI between the ages of 3.5 and 6.5 years as part of a prospective clinical trial completed assessments of word recognition in quiet, masked sentence recognition, and sound source localization at regular intervals out to 24-month postactivation. Eighteen peers with bilateral NH, matched by age at the group level, completed the same test battery. Performance at 24-month postactivation for the SSD group was compared to the performance of the NH group.

RESULTS

Children with SSD have significantly poorer speech recognition in quiet, masked sentence recognition, and localization both with and without the use of the CI than their peers with NH. The SSD group experienced significant benefits with the CI+NH versus the NH ear alone on measures of isolated word recognition, masked sentence recognition, and localization. These benefits were realized within the first 3 months of use and were maintained through the 24-month postactivation interval.

CONCLUSIONS

Young children with SSD who use a CI experience significant isolated word recognition and bilateral spatial hearing benefits, although their performance remains poorer than their peers with NH.

Long-Term Binaural Hearing Improvements for Cochlear Implant Users with Asymmetric Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

To assess long-term binaural hearing abilities for cochlear implant (CI) users with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL).

METHODS

A prospective, longitudinal, repeated measures study was completed at a tertiary referral center evaluating adults with UHL or AHL undergoing cochlear implantation. Binaural hearing abilities were assessed with masked speech recognition tasks using AzBio sentences in a 10-talker masker. Performance was evaluated as the ability to benefit from spatial release from masking (SRM). SRM was calculated as the difference in scores when the masker was presented toward the CI-ear (SRMci ) or the contralateral ear (SRMcontra ) relative to the co-located condition (0°). Assessments were completed pre-operatively and at annual intervals out to 5 years post-activation.

RESULTS

Twenty UHL and 19 AHL participants were included in the study. Linear Mixed Models showed significant main effects of interval and group for SRMcontra . There was a significant interaction between interval and group, with UHL participants reaching asymptotic performance early and AHL participants demonstrating continued growth in binaural abilities to 5 years post-activation. The improvement in SRM showed a significant positive correlation with contralateral unaided hearing thresholds (p = 0.050) as well as age at implantation (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

CI recipients with UHL and AHL showed improved SRM with long-term device use. The time course of improvement varied by cohort, with the UHL cohort reaching asymptotic performance early and the AHL cohort continuing to improve beyond 1 year. Differences between cohorts could be driven by differences in age at implantation as well as contralateral unaided hearing thresholds.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 133:1480-1485, 2023.

Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in Adults With Single-Sided Deafness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess spatial hearing, tinnitus, and quality-of-life outcomes in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) who underwent cochlear implantation.

DATABASES REVIEWED

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched from January 2008 to September 2021 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

METHODS

Studies reporting spatial hearing, tinnitus, and quality-of-life outcomes in adult cochlear implant (CI) recipients (≥18 yr old) with SSD were evaluated. Study characteristics, demographic data, spatial hearing (speech recognition in noise, sound source localization), tinnitus (severity, loudness), and quality-of-life outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

From an initial search of 1,147 articles, 36 studies that evaluated CI use in 796 unique adults with SSD (51.3 ± 12.4 yr of age at time of implantation) were included. The mean duration of deafness was 6.2 ± 9.6 years. There was evidence of improvement for speech recognition in noise using different target-to-masker spatial configurations, with the largest benefit observed for target-to-masker configurations assessing head shadow (mean, 1.87-6.2 dB signal-to-noise ratio). Sound source localization, quantified as root-mean-squared error, improved with CI use (mean difference [MD], -25.3 degrees; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -35.9 to -14.6 degrees; p < 0.001). Also, CI users reported a significant reduction in tinnitus severity as measured with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (MD, -29.97; 95% CI, -43.9 to -16.1; p < 0.001) and an improvement in spatial hearing abilities as measured with the Spatial, Speech, and Qualities of Hearing questionnaire (MD, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.7 to 2.8; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation and CI use consistently offer improvements in speech recognition in noise, sound source localization, tinnitus, and perceived quality of life in adults with SSD.

Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Single-Sided Deafness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical outcomes of adult patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) undergoing ipsilateral cochlear implantation.

DATA SOURCE

An electronic search of Medline and Embase articles.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic review was performed with a search strategy developed by a licensed librarian to identify studies of adult patients with SSD who underwent ipsilateral cochlear implantation. Articles were managed in Covidence and evaluated by 2 independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed and data were extracted, including patient demographics, etiology of deafness, duration of deafness, and postoperative change in speech recognition, tinnitus, sound localization, and quality of life (QoL). A meta-analysis was performed, and pooled mean differences were calculated for each outcome of interest via random effects models by each outcome, as well as subgroup analyses by the individual clinical score used.

RESULTS

Of 2309 studies identified, 185 full texts were evaluated, and 50 were ultimately included involving 674 patients. Speech perception scores in quiet and noise, tinnitus control, sound localization, and QoL all significantly improved after implantation. Pooled outcomes demonstrated score improvements in speech perception (standardized mean difference [SMD], 2.8 [95% CI, 2.16-3.43]), QoL (SMD, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.45-0.91]), sound localization (SMD, -1.13 [95% CI, -1.68 to -0.57]), and tinnitus score reduction (SMD, -1.32 [95% CI, -1.85 to -0.80]).

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation in adults with SSD results in significant improvements in speech perception, tinnitus control, sound localization, and QoL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Long-Term Improvement in Localization for Cochlear Implant Users with Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To assess whether early, significant improvements in sound source localization observed in cochlear implant (CI) recipients with normal hearing (NH) in the contralateral ear are maintained after 5 years of CI use.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, repeated measures study.

METHODS

Participants were recruited from a sample of CI + NH listeners (n = 20) who received their device as part of a prospective clinical trial investigating outcomes of CI use for adult cases of single-sided deafness. Sound source localization was assessed annually after the clinical trial endpoint (1-year post-activation). Listeners were asked to indicate the perceived sound source for a broadband noise burst presented randomly at varied intensity levels from one of 11 speakers along a 180° arc. Performance was quantified as root-mean-squared (RMS) error.

RESULTS

Linear mixed models showed superior post-activation performance was maintained with long-term CI use as compared to preoperative abilities (P < .001). Unexpectedly, a significant improvement (P = .009) in sound source localization was observed over the long-term post-activation period (1-5 years). To better understand these long-term findings, the response patterns for the 11 participants who were evaluated at the 1- and 5-year visits were reviewed. This subgroup demonstrated a significant improvement in RMS error (P = .020) and variable error (P = .031), indicating more consistent responses at the 5-year visit.

CONCLUSION

Adult CI + NH listeners experience significant improvements in sound source localization within the initial weeks of listening experience, with additional improvements observed after long-term device use. The present sample demonstrated significant improvements between the 1-year and 5-year visits, with greater accuracy and consistency noted in their response patterns.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 132:2453-2458, 2022.

Further Evidence for Individual Ear Consideration in Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

To report speech outcomes after cochlear implantation (CI) for asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) and assess the influence of contralateral hearing.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

One hundred eighty-eight adults (mean age, 70 yr) undergoing CI for AHL from 2015 to 2020. Candidacy included pure-tone average (PTA) at least 70 dB hearing level and AzBio in quiet 60% or less in the implanted ear and AzBio in quiet greater than 40% in the contralateral ear.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

PTA; Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word, AzBio sentences scores; Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ).

RESULTS

Mean preoperative PTA and AzBio in the implanted and contralateral ears were 85.2 and 68.1 dB hearing level and 24.7% and 69.2%, respectively. Mean CNC in the implanted ear increased from 18.3% preoperatively to 44.4% ( p < 0.0001) at 6 months and 49.3% ( p < 0.0001) at 12 months. Mean AzBio in the implanted ear improved from 24.7% preoperatively to 60.3% ( p < 0.0001) at 6 months and 64.3% ( p < 0.0001) at 12 months. Patients demonstrated significant improvement in all SSQ domains at 6 and 12 months. When comparing patients with preoperative contralateral AzBio greater than 60% versus 41% to 60%, no significant differences existed in postoperative CNC scores (6-mo: 47% versus 41%, p = 0.276; 12-mo: 51% versus 47%, p = 0.543). There were no significant differences in 6-month ( p = 0.936) or 12-month ( p = 0.792) CNC scores between patients with AHL (contralateral ear AzBio >40%) and 169 unilateral CI patients meeting the traditional Medicare criteria (contralateral ear AzBio ≤40%).

CONCLUSION

CI recipients with AHL derive significant speech improvements, supporting individual ear consideration for CI candidacy and patient benefit outside of current Medicare criteria.

Cochlear implantation for paediatric and adult cases of unilateral and asymmetric hearing loss

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Children and adults with unilateral or asymmetric hearing loss (UHL/AHL) have poorer spatial hearing (e.g. speech understanding in complex maskers and localization) and quality of life compared with peers with normal hearing bilaterally. Patients with UHL/AHL experience limited benefits with contralateral-routing technologies (e.g. bone conduction, CROS hearing aid systems). Cochlear implantation allows for stimulation of the auditory pathway for the poorer hearing ear. The present study reviews the recent literature on outcomes of cochlear implant use for recipients with UHL/AHL.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent research corroborates previous investigations of the significant benefits on measures of spatial hearing, tinnitus severity and quality of life for adult cochlear implant recipients. These benefits are also observed in pediatric cochlear implant recipients, with an association of better outcomes with younger ages at implantation for congenital cases and shorter durations of UHL/AHL for acquired cases. In addition, randomized trials demonstrate better outcomes with cochlear implant use versus contralateral-routing technologies.

SUMMARY

Cochlear implantation supports better spatial hearing and quality of life in children and adults with UHL/AHL as compared to alternative listening conditions. Current research supports the expansion of candidacy criteria and insurance coverage for cochlear implantation for patients with UHL/AHL to improve their binaural hearing.

American Cochlear Implant Alliance Task Force Guidelines for Clinical Assessment and Management of Adult Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness

The indications for cochlear implantation have expanded to include individuals with profound sensorineural hearing loss in the impaired ear and normal hearing (NH) in the contralateral ear, known as single-sided deafness (SSD). There are additional considerations for the clinical assessment and management of adult cochlear implant candidates and recipients with SSD as compared to conventional cochlear implant candidates with bilateral moderate to profound sensorineural hearing loss. The present report reviews the current evidence relevant to the assessment and management of adults with SSD. A systematic review was also conducted on published studies that investigated outcomes of cochlear implant use on measures of speech recognition in quiet and noise, sound source localization, tinnitus perception, and quality of life for this patient population. Expert consensus and systematic review of the current literature were combined to provide guidance for the clinical assessment and management of adults with SSD.

Conversations in Cochlear Implantation: The Inner Ear Therapy of Today

As biomolecular approaches for hearing restoration in profound sensorineural hearing loss evolve, they will be applied in conjunction with or instead of cochlear implants. An understanding of the current state-of-the-art of this technology, including its advantages, disadvantages, and its potential for delivering and interacting with biomolecular hearing restoration approaches, is helpful for designing modern hearing-restoration strategies. Cochlear implants (CI) have evolved over the last four decades to restore hearing more effectively, in more people, with diverse indications. This evolution has been driven by advances in technology, surgery, and healthcare delivery. Here, we offer a practical treatise on the state of cochlear implantation directed towards developing the next generation of inner ear therapeutics. We aim to capture and distill conversations ongoing in CI research, development, and clinical management. In this review, we discuss successes and physiological constraints of hearing with an implant, common surgical approaches and electrode arrays, new indications and outcome measures for implantation, and barriers to CI utilization. Additionally, we compare cochlear implantation with biomolecular and pharmacological approaches, consider strategies to combine these approaches, and identify unmet medical needs with cochlear implants. The strengths and weaknesses of modern implantation highlighted here can mark opportunities for continued progress or improvement in the design and delivery of the next generation of inner ear therapeutics.

Prevalence of Single-Sided Deafness in the United States

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to obtain a reliable estimate of single-sided deafness (SSD) prevalence in the adult U.S.

POPULATION

METHODS

A cross-sectional national epidemiologic study was performed. Participants were included from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Each cohort includes a nationally representative sample of approximately 5,000 noninstitutionalized civilians. Subjects 20 years old and over with audiometric testing were included. SSD was defined as normal hearing (pure-tone average [PTA] of ≤25 dB) in one ear and severe or worse hearing (PTA > 70 dB) in the other, using both three- and four-frequency PTA definition. Prevalence was measured as a raw number (n) and percentage (%) of the sample. Weighted estimates of prevalence were calculated based on the 2019 U.S. population census.

RESULTS

An estimated 345,064 Americans (estimated prevalence of 0.14%, 95% confidence interval = 0.08-0.24) had SSD. SSD was more prevalent in individuals 60 to 79 years of age (estimated 155,917 U.S. adults, prevalence of 0.25%). A higher prevalence of SSD was noted among women compared to men (215,430 U.S. adult women, prevalence of 0.17% vs. 131,726 U.S. adult men, prevalence of 0.11%). Using a three-frequency PTA definition resulted in an estimated prevalence of 0.11%. Finally, 27% of adults with SSD reported having "good" or "excellent" hearing despite their hearing loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of SSD in the United States is estimated at 0.11%-0.14% (271,122 to 345,064 adults), depending on PTA definition used. These individuals could potentially benefit from auditory rehabilitation, including cochlear implantation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 Laryngoscope, 2021.

Sound Localization in Single-Sided Deaf Participants Provided With a Cochlear Implant

Spatial hearing is crucial in real life but deteriorates in participants with severe sensorineural hearing loss or single-sided deafness. This ability can potentially be improved with a unilateral cochlear implant (CI). The present study investigated measures of sound localization in participants with single-sided deafness provided with a CI. Sound localization was measured separately at eight loudspeaker positions (4°, 30°, 60°, and 90°) on the CI side and on the normal-hearing side. Low- and high-frequency noise bursts were used in the tests to investigate possible differences in the processing of interaural time and level differences. Data were compared to normal-hearing adults aged between 20 and 83. In addition, the benefit of the CI in speech understanding in noise was compared to the localization ability. Fifteen out of 18 participants were able to localize signals on the CI side and on the normal-hearing side, although performance was highly variable across participants. Three participants always pointed to the normal-hearing side, irrespective of the location of the signal. The comparison with control data showed that participants had particular difficulties localizing sounds at frontal locations and on the CI side. In contrast to most previous results, participants were able to localize low-frequency signals, although they localized high-frequency signals more accurately. Speech understanding in noise was better with the CI compared to testing without CI, but only at a position where the CI also improved sound localization. Our data suggest that a CI can, to a large extent, restore localization in participants with single-sided deafness. Difficulties may remain at frontal locations and on the CI side. However, speech understanding in noise improves when wearing the CI. The treatment with a CI in these participants might provide real-world benefits, such as improved orientation in traffic and speech understanding in difficult listening situations.

Influence of Cochlear Implant Use on Perceived Listening Effort in Adult and Pediatric Cases of Unilateral and Asymmetric Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

Assess the influence of cochlear implant (CI) use on the perceived listening effort of adult and pediatric subjects with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Adults and children with UHL or AHL.

INTERVENTION

Cochlear implantation. Subjects received their CI as part of a clinical trial assessing the effectiveness of cochlear implantation in cases of UHL and AHL.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Responses to the Listening Effort pragmatic subscale on the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) or SSQ for Children with Impaired Hearing (SSQ-C) were compared over the study period. Subjects or their parents completed the questionnaires preoperatively and at predetermined postactivation intervals. For the adult subjects, responses were compared to word recognition in quiet and sentence recognition in noise.

RESULTS

Forty adult subjects (n = 20 UHL, n = 20 AHL) and 16 pediatric subjects with UHL enrolled and underwent cochlear implantation. Subjects in all three groups reported a significant reduction in perceived listening effort within the initial months of CI use (p < 0.001; η2 ≥ 0.351). The perceived benefit was significantly correlated with speech recognition in noise for the adult subjects with UHL at the 12-month interval (r(20) = .59, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Adult and pediatric CI recipients with UHL or AHL report a reduction in listening effort with CI use as compared to their preoperative experiences. Use of the SSQ and SSQ-C Listening Effort pragmatic subscale may provide additional information about a CI recipient's experience beyond the abilities measured in the sound booth.

Benefits of Cochlear Implantation in Childhood Unilateral Hearing Loss (CUHL Trial)

Objectives/Hypotheses

Children with unilateral sensory hearing loss (UHL) struggle to understand speech in noise and locate the origin of sound and have reduced quality of hearing. This clinical trial will determine the benefits of cochlear implantation in children with UHL.

Study Design

Prospective clinical trial.

Methods

Twenty children with at least moderate to profound sensory hearing loss and poor speech perception (word score <30%) in one ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear participated in a Food and Drug Administration‐approved clinical trial. Subjects were evaluated for speech perception in quiet, speech perception in noise, sound localization, and subjective benefits after implantation.

Results

CNC word score perception in quiet significantly improved (1% to 50%, P < .0001) by 12 months after activation. Speech perception in noise by BKB‐SIN significantly improved in all three noise configurations; there was a 3.6 dB advantage in head shadow (P < .0001), a 1.6 dB advantage in summation (P = .003), and a 2.5 dB advantage in squelch (P = .0001). Localization improved by 26° at 9 months (P < .0001). Speech, Spatial, and Qualities (SSQ) demonstrated significant improvements in speech (5.2 to 7.4, P = .0012), qualities of hearing (5.9 to 7.5, P = .0056), and spatial hearing (2.7 to 6.6, P < .0001). SSQ subscales associated with binaural hearing were significantly improved, as was listening effort (P = .0082). Subjects demonstrated a non‐significant improvement in fatigue.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that children with UHL significantly benefit from cochlear implantation.

Level of Evidence

Level 3 Laryngoscope, 132:S1–S18, 2022

Cochlear Implantation in the Setting of Menière's Disease After Labyrinthectomy: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Characterize the speech recognition and sound source localization of patients with unilateral Menière's disease who undergo labyrinthectomy for vertigo control with simultaneous or sequential cochlear implantation.

DATABASES REVIEWED

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases.

METHODS

The search was performed on May 6, 2020. The keywords utilized included: "Menière's disease AND cochlear implant;" "cochlear implant AND single sided deafness;" "cochlear implant AND vestibular;" and "labyrinthectomy AND cochlear implant." Manuscripts published in English with a publication date after 1995 that assessed adult subjects (≥18 years of age) were included for review. Subjects must have been diagnosed with Menière's disease unilaterally and underwent labyrinthectomy with simultaneous or sequential cochlear implantation. Reported outcomes with cochlear implant (CI) use included speech recognition as measured with the consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) word test and/or sound source localization reported in root-mean squared (RMS) error. The method of data collection and study type were recorded to assess level of evidence. Statistical analysis was performed with Wilcoxon signed ranks test.

RESULTS

Data from 14 CI recipients met the criteria for inclusion. Word recognition comparisons between the preoperative interval and a postactivation interval demonstrated a significant improvement with the CI (p = 0.014), with an average improvement of 23% (range -16 to 50%). Sound source localization postoperatively with the CI demonstrated an average RMS error of 26° (SD 6.8, range 18.7-43.1°) compared to the 42° (SD 19.1, range 18-85°) in the preoperative or CI off condition, these two conditions were not statistically different (p = 0.148).

CONCLUSION

Cochlear implantation and labyrinthectomy in adult patients with Menière's disease can support improvements in speech recognition and sound source localization for some CI users, though observed performance may be poorer than traditional CI candidates.

Single-Sided Deafness Cochlear Implant Sound-Localization Behavior With Multiple Concurrent Sources

OBJECTIVES

For listeners with one deaf ear and the other ear with normal/near-normal hearing (single-sided deafness [SSD]) or moderate hearing loss (asymmetric hearing loss), cochlear implants (CIs) can improve speech understanding in noise and sound-source localization. Previous SSD-CI localization studies have used a single source with artificial sounds such as clicks or random noise. While this approach provides insights regarding the auditory cues that facilitate localization, it does not capture the complex nature of localization behavior in real-world environments. This study examined SSD-CI sound localization in a complex scenario where a target sound was added to or removed from a mixture of other environmental sounds, while tracking head movements to assess behavioral strategy.

DESIGN

Eleven CI users with normal hearing or moderate hearing loss in the contralateral ear completed a sound-localization task in monaural (CI-OFF) and bilateral (CI-ON) configurations. Ten of the listeners were also tested before CI activation to examine longitudinal effects. Two-second environmental sound samples, looped to create 4- or 10-sec trials, were presented in a spherical array of 26 loudspeakers encompassing ±144° azimuth and ±30° elevation at a 1-m radius. The target sound was presented alone (localize task) or concurrently with one or three additional sources presented to different loudspeakers, with the target cued by being added to (Add) or removed from (Rem) the mixture after 6 sec. A head-mounted tracker recorded movements in six dimensions (three for location, three for orientation). Mixed-model regression was used to examine target sound-identification accuracy, localization accuracy, and head movement. Angular and translational head movements were analyzed both before and after the target was switched on or off.

RESULTS

Listeners showed improved localization accuracy in the CI-ON configuration, but there was no interaction with test condition and no effect of the CI on sound-identification performance. Although high-frequency hearing loss in the unimplanted ear reduced localization accuracy and sound-identification performance, the magnitude of the CI localization benefit was independent of hearing loss. The CI reduced the magnitude of gross head movements used during the task in the azimuthal rotation and translational dimensions, both while the target sound was present (in all conditions) and during the anticipatory period before the target was switched on (in the Add condition). There was no change in pre- versus post-activation CI-OFF performance.

CONCLUSIONS

These results extend previous findings, demonstrating a CI localization benefit in a complex listening scenario that includes environmental and behavioral elements encountered in everyday listening conditions. The CI also reduced the magnitude of gross head movements used to perform the task. This was the case even before the target sound was added to the mixture. This suggests that a CI can reduce the need for physical movement both in anticipation of an upcoming sound event and while actively localizing the target sound. Overall, these results show that for SSD listeners, a CI can improve localization in a complex sound environment and reduce the amount of physical movement used.

Systematic review of outcome domains and instruments used in designs of clinical trials for interventions that seek to restore bilateral and binaural hearing in adults with unilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss ('single-sided deafness')

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to identify, compare and contrast outcome domains and outcome instruments reported in studies investigating interventions that seek to restore bilateral (two-sided) and/or binaural (both ears) hearing in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD). Findings can inform the development of evidence-based guidance to facilitate design decisions for confirmatory trials.

METHODS

Records were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP and the NIHR UK clinical trials gateway. The search included records published from 1946 to March 2020. Included studies were those as follows: (a) recruiting adults aged 18 years or older diagnosed with SSD of average threshold severity worse than 70 dB HL in the worse-hearing ear and normal (or near-normal) hearing in the better-hearing ear, (b) evaluating interventions to restore bilateral and/or binaural hearing and (c) enrolling those adults in a controlled trial, before-and-after study or cross-over study. Studies that fell just short of the participant eligibility criteria were included in a separate sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Ninety-six studies were included (72 full inclusion, 24 sensitivity analysis). For fully included studies, 37 exclusively evaluated interventions to re-establish bilateral hearing and 29 exclusively evaluated interventions to restore binaural hearing. Overall, 520 outcome domains were identified (350 primary and 170 secondary). Speech-related outcome domains were the most common (74% of studies), followed by spatial-related domains (60% of studies). A total of 344 unique outcome instruments were reported. Speech-related outcome domains were measured by 73 different instruments and spatial-related domains by 43 different instruments. There was considerable variability in duration of follow-up, ranging from acute (baseline) testing to 10 years after the intervention. The sensitivity analysis identified no additional outcome domains.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified large variability in the reporting of outcome domains and instruments in studies evaluating the therapeutic benefits and harms of SSD interventions. Reports frequently omitted information on what domains the study intended to assess, and on what instruments were used to measure which domains.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The systematic review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): Registration Number CRD42018084274 . Registered on 13 March 2018, last revised on 7th of May 2019.

Signal processing & audio processors

Signal processing algorithms are the hidden components in the audio processor that converts the received acoustic signal into electrical impulses while maintaining as much relevant information as possible. Signal processing algorithms should be smart enough to mimic the functionality of external, middle and the inner-ear to provide the cochlear implant (CI) user with a hearing experience as natural as possible. Modern sound processing strategies are based on the continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) strategy proposed by B. Wilson in 1991, which provided envelope information over several intracochlear electrodes. The CIS strategy brought significant gains in speech perception. Translational research activities of MED-EL resulted in further improvements in speech understanding in noisy environments as well as enjoyment of music by not only coding CIS-based envelope information, but by also representing temporal fine structure information in the stimulation patterns of the apical channels. Further developments include "complete cochlear coverage" made possible by deep insertion of the intracochlear electrode, elaborate front end processing, anatomy based fitting (ABF), triphasic pulse stimulation instrumental in the suppression of facial nerve stimulation, and bimodal delay compensation allowing unilateral CI users to experience hearing with hearing aids on the contralateral ear. The large number of hardware developments might be exemplified by the RONDO, the world's first single unit audio processor in 2013. This article covers the milestones of translational research around the signal processing and audio processor topic that took place in association with MED-EL.

CI in single-sided deafness

The cochlear implant (CI) as a treatment option for single-sided deafness (SSD) started with a clinical study looking in to the influence of cochlear implantation with a MED-EL device on incapacitating unilateral tinnitus in SSD. The study began in 2003 and was conducted by P. Van de Heyning and his team in Antwerp, Belgium. The first CI in SSD without tinnitus in Germany was implanted by J. Mueller and R. Jacob in Koblenz in 2005. Translational research activities took place since then to evaluate the CI as a treatment option for SSD not only in adults but also in children. They assessed the hearing performance of SSD patients implanted with CI, importance of long electrode arrays in SSD patients, degree of acceptance of CI by SSD children, importance of early CI implantation in SSD children in developing language skills, music enjoyment by hearing with two ears and evidence on spiral ganglion cell body distribution. In 2013, MED-EL was the first CI manufacturer to receive the CE mark for the indication of SSD and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) in adults and children. In 2019, MED-EL was the first CI manufacturer to get its CI device approved for patients over the age of five with SSD and AHL, by the FDA in the USA. This article covers the milestones of translational research from the first concept to the widespread clinical use of CI in SSD.

The impact of cochlear implant microphone settings on the binaural hearing of experienced cochlear implant users with single-sided deafness

OBJECTIVE

Cochlear implantation has become a well-accepted treatment option for people with single-sided deafness (SSD) and has become a clinical standard in many countries. A cochlear implant (CI) is the only device which restores binaural hearing. The effect of microphone directionality (MD) settings has been investigated in other CI indication groups, but its impact on speech perception in noise has not been established in CI users with SSD. The focus of this investigation was, therefore, to assess binaural hearing effects using different MD settings in CI users with SSD.

METHODS

Twenty-nine experienced CI users with SSD were recruited to determine speech reception thresholds with varying target and noise sources to define binaural effects (head shadow, squelch, summation, and spatial release from masking), sound localization, and sound quality using the SSQ12 and HISQUI₁₉ questionnaires. Outcome measures included the MD settings "natural", "adaptive", and "omnidirectional".

RESULTS

The 29 participants involved in the study were divided into two groups: 11 SONNET users and 18 OPUS 2/RONDO users. In both groups, a significant head shadow effect of 7.4-9.2 dB was achieved with the CI. The MD setting "adaptive" provided a significant head shadow effect of 9.2 dB, a squelch effect of 0.9 dB, and spatial release from masking of 7.6 dB in the SONNET group. No significant summation effect could be determined in either group with CI. Outcomes with the omnidirectional setting were not significantly different between groups. For both groups, localization improved significantly when the CI was activated and was best when the omnidirectional setting was used. The groups' sound quality scores did not significantly differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Adaptive directional microphone settings improve speech perception and binaural hearing abilities in CI users with SSD. Binaural effect measures are valuable to quantify the benefit of CI use, especially in this indication group.

Cochlear Implantation in Cases of Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Subjective Benefit, Word Recognition, and Spatial Hearing

A prospective clinical trial evaluated the effectiveness of cochlear implantation in adults with asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Twenty subjects with mild-to-moderate hearing loss in the better ear and moderate-to-profound hearing loss in the poorer ear underwent cochlear implantation of the poorer hearing ear. Subjects were evaluated preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-activation. Preoperative performance was evaluated unaided, with traditional hearing aids (HAs) or with a bone-conduction HA. Post-activation performance was evaluated with the cochlear implant (CI) alone or in combination with a contralateral HA (bimodal). Test measures included subjective benefit, word recognition, and spatial hearing (i.e., localization and masked sentence recognition). Significant subjective benefit was reported as early as the 1-month interval, indicating better performance with the CI compared with the preferred preoperative condition. Aided word recognition with the CI alone was significantly improved at the 1-month interval compared with preoperative performance with an HA and continued to improve through the 12-month interval. Subjects demonstrated early, significant improvements in the bimodal condition on the spatial hearing tasks compared with baseline preoperative performance tested unaided. The magnitude of the benefit was reduced for subjects with AHL when compared with published data on CI users with normal hearing in the contralateral ear; this finding may reflect significant differences in age at implantation and hearing sensitivity across cohorts.

Mechanisms of Localization and Speech Perception with Colocated and Spatially Separated Noise and Speech Maskers Under Single-Sided Deafness with a Cochlear Implant

OBJECTIVES

This study tested listeners with a cochlear implant (CI) in one ear and acoustic hearing in the other ear, to assess their ability to localize sound and to understand speech in collocated or spatially separated noise or speech maskers.

DESIGN

Eight CI listeners with contralateral acoustic hearing ranging from normal hearing to moderate sensorineural hearing loss were tested. Localization accuracy was measured in five of the listeners using stimuli that emphasized the separate contributions of interaural level differences (ILDs) and interaural time differences (ITD) in the temporal envelope and/or fine structure. Sentence recognition was tested in all eight CI listeners, using collocated and spatially separated speech-shaped Gaussian noise and two-talker babble. Performance was compared with that of age-matched normal-hearing listeners via loudspeakers or via headphones with vocoder simulations of CI processing.

RESULTS

Localization improved with the CI but only when high-frequency ILDs were available. Listeners experienced no additional benefit via ITDs in the stimulus envelope or fine structure using real or vocoder-simulated CIs. Speech recognition in two-talker babble improved with a CI in seven of the eight listeners when the target was located at the front and the babble was presented on the side of the acoustic-hearing ear, but otherwise showed little or no benefit of a CI.

CONCLUSION

Sound localization can be improved with a CI in cases of significant residual hearing in the contralateral ear, but only for sounds with high-frequency content, and only based on ILDs. In speech understanding, the CI contributed most when it was in the ear with the better signal to noise ratio with a speech masker.

Subjective Benefits of Bimodal Listening in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Asymmetric Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the influence of cochlear implant (CI) use on subjective benefits in quality of life in cases of asymmetric hearing loss (AHL).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective clinical trial.

SETTING

Tertiary academic center.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Subjects included CI recipients with AHL (n = 20), defined as moderate-to-profound hearing loss in the affected ear and mild-to-moderate hearing loss in the contralateral ear. Quality of life was assessed with the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) pragmatic subscales, which assess binaural benefits. Subjective benefit on the pragmatic subscales was compared to word recognition in quiet and spatial hearing abilities (ie, masked sentence recognition and localization).

RESULTS

Subjects demonstrated an early, significant improvement (P < .01) in abilities with the CI as compared to preoperative abilities on the SSQ pragmatic subscales by the 1-month interval. Perceived abilities were either maintained or continued to improve over the study period. There were no significant correlations between results on the Speech in Quiet subscale and word recognition in quiet, the Speech in Speech Contexts subscale and masked sentence recognition, or the Localization subscale and sound field localization.

CONCLUSIONS

CI recipients with AHL report a significant improvement in quality of life as measured by the SSQ pragmatic subscales over preoperative abilities. Reported improvements are observed as early as 1 month postactivation, which likely reflect the binaural benefits of listening with bimodal stimulation (CI and contralateral hearing aid). The SSQ pragmatic subscales may provide a more in-depth insight into CI recipient experience as compared to behavioral sound field measures alone.

Low-Frequency Hearing Preservation With Long Electrode Arrays: Inclusion of Unaided Hearing Threshold Assessment in the Postoperative Test Battery

Purpose

The goal of this work was to evaluate the low-frequency hearing preservation of long electrode array cochlear implant (CI) recipients.

Method

Twenty-five participants presented with an unaided hearing threshold of ≤ 80 dB HL at 125 Hz pre-operatively in the ear to be implanted. Participants were implanted with a long (31.5-mm) electrode array. The unaided hearing threshold at 125 Hz was compared between the preoperative and postoperative intervals (i.e., initial CI activation, and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after activation).

Results

Eight participants maintained an unaided hearing threshold of ≤ 80 dB HL at 125 Hz postoperatively. The majority (n = 5) demonstrated aidable low-frequency hearing at initial activation, whereas 3 other participants experienced an improvement in unaided low-frequency hearing thresholds at subsequent intervals.

Conclusions

CI recipients can retain residual hearing sensitivity with fully inserted long electrode arrays, and low-frequency hearing thresholds may improve during the postoperative period. Therefore, unaided hearing thresholds obtained within the initial weeks after surgery may not reflect later hearing sensitivity. Routine measurement of postoperative unaided hearing thresholds—even for patients who did not demonstrate aidable hearing thresholds initially after cochlear implantation—will identify CI recipients who may benefit from electric–acoustic stimulation.

Supplemental Material

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.11356637

Long-term audiologic outcomes after cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term audiometric outcomes, sound localization abilities, binaural benefits, and tinnitus assessment of subjects with cochlear implant (CI) after a diagnosis of unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss.

METHOD

The study group consisted of 60 (mean age 52 years, range 19-84) subjects with profound hearing loss in one ear and normal to near-normal hearing in the other ear who underwent CI. Data analysis included pre- and postoperative Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) Word scores, AzBio Sentence scores, pure tone thresholds, sound localization, and Iowa Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire scores.

RESULTS

Preoperative average duration of deafness was 3.69 years (standard deviation 4.31), with an average follow-up time of 37.9 months (range 1-87). CNC and AzBio scores significantly improved (both P < 0.001) postoperatively among the entire cohort, and there was much heterogeneity in outcomes with respect to deafness etiology subgroup analysis. Sound localization abilities tended to improve longitudinally in the entire cohort. Binaural benefits using an adaptive Hearing in Noise Test test showed a significant (P < 0.001) improvement with head shadow effect. Utilizing the Iowa Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire, there was significant improvement in social, physical, and emotional well-being (P = 0.011), along with hearing abilities (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This case series is the largest cohort of CI SSD subjects to date and systematically analyzes their functional outcomes. Subjects have meaningful improvement in word understanding, and sound localization tends to gradually improve over time. Binaural benefit analysis showed significant improvement with head shadow effect, which likely provides ease of listening.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 130:1805-1811, 2020.

Pleasantness Ratings for Harmonic Intervals With Acoustic and Electric Hearing in Unilaterally Deaf Cochlear Implant Patients

Background

Harmony is an important part of tonal music that conveys context, form and emotion. Two notes sounded simultaneously form a harmonic interval. In normal-hearing (NH) listeners, some harmonic intervals (e.g., minor 2nd, tritone, major 7th) typically sound more dissonant than others (e.g., octave, major 3rd, 4th). Because of the limited spectro-temporal resolution afforded by cochlear implants (CIs), music perception is generally poor. However, CI users may still be sensitive to relative dissonance across intervals. In this study, dissonance ratings for harmonic intervals were measured in 11 unilaterally deaf CI patients, in whom ratings from the CI could be compared to those from the normal ear.

Methods

Stimuli consisted of pairs of equal amplitude MIDI piano tones. Intervals spanned a range of two octaves relative to two root notes (F3 or C4). Dissonance was assessed in terms of subjective pleasantness ratings for intervals presented to the NH ear alone, the CI ear alone, and both ears together (NH + CI). Ratings were collected for both root notes for within- and across-octave intervals (1–12 and 13–24 semitones). Participants rated the pleasantness of each interval by clicking on a line anchored with “least pleasant” and “most pleasant.” A follow-up experiment repeated the task with a smaller stimulus set.

Results

With NH-only listening, within-octave intervals minor 2nd, major 2nd, and major 7th were rated least pleasant; major 3rd, 5th, and octave were rated most pleasant. Across-octave counterparts were similarly rated. With CI-only listening, ratings were consistently lower and showed a reduced range. Mean ratings were highly correlated between NH-only and CI-only listening (r = 0.845, p < 0.001). Ratings were similar between NH-only and NH + CI listening, with no significant binaural enhancement/interference. The follow-up tests showed that ratings were reliable for the least and most pleasant intervals.

Discussion

Although pleasantness ratings were less differentiated for the CI ear than the NH ear, there were similarities between the two listening modes. Given the lack of spectro-temporal detail needed for harmonicity-based distinctions, temporal envelope interactions (within and across channels) associated with a perception of roughness may contribute to dissonance perception for harmonic intervals with CI-only listening.

Low-Frequency Pitch Perception in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Normal Hearing in the Contralateral Ear

Purpose Three experiments were carried out to evaluate the low-frequency pitch perception of adults with unilateral hearing loss who received a cochlear implant (CI). Method Participants were recruited from a cohort of CI users with unilateral hearing loss and normal hearing in the contralateral ear. First, low-frequency pitch perception was assessed for the 5 most apical electrodes at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after CI activation using an adaptive pitch-matching task. Participants listened with a coding strategy that presents low-frequency temporal fine structure (TFS) and compared the pitch to that of an acoustic target presented to the normal hearing ear. Next, participants listened with an envelope-only, continuous interleaved sampling strategy. Pitch perception was compared between coding strategies to assess the influence of TFS cues on low-frequency pitch perception. Finally, participants completed a vocal pitch-matching task to corroborate the results obtained with the adaptive pitch-matching task. Results Pitch matches roughly corresponded to electrode center frequencies (CFs) in the CI map. Adaptive pitch matches exceeded the CF for the most apical electrode, an effect that was larger for continuous interleaved sampling than TFS. Vocal pitch matches were variable but correlated with the CF of the 3 most apical electrodes. There was no evidence that pitch matches changed between the 1- and 12-month intervals. Conclusions Relatively accurate and asymptotic pitch perception was observed at the 1-month interval, indicating either very rapid acclimatization or the provision of familiar place and rate cues. Early availability of appropriate pitch cues could have played a role in the early improvements in localization and masked speech recognition previously observed in this cohort. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8862389.

Implications of dried blood spot testing for congenital CMV on management of children with hearing loss: A preliminary report

INTRODUCTION

Non-genetic, congenital sensorineural hearing loss (cSNHL) is commonly caused by congenital CMV infection (cCMV). Hearing loss related to cCMV is variable in degree, often progressive, and can affect one or both ears.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine the outcomes of DBS testing in California, and the hearing outcomes of cCMV-positive children.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients with SNHL of unknown etiology aged 6 months to 17 years old presenting to a tertiary care pediatric center and evaluated for cCMV by DBS testing.

RESULTS

114 children (228 ears) with SNHL of unknown origin were included. 6/114 (5.3%) tested positive for cCMV versus 108/114 (94.7%), who tested negative. None of the cCMV-positive children had symmetric bilateral hearing loss, compared with 56.5% (61/108) of cCMV-negative children (p < 0.05). cCMV-positive children were more likely to have profound SNHL in the worse-hearing ear (5/6 (83%) vs 16/108 (14.9%) of cCMV-negative children, p < 0.001). 86% (5/6) exhibited progressive hearing loss, including progression or new-onset hearing loss in the previously better hearing ear. 3 of the 6 children with cCMV underwent CI.

CONCLUSION

A small proportion of patients presenting with SNHL tested positive on DBS. Of cCMV-positive children, most presented with profound hearing loss in the worse-hearing ear, and 50% of cCMV-positive children developed progressive hearing loss in the initially better-hearing ear. Prognostic information afforded by etiologic confirmation of cCMV infection informed decision-making concerning cochlear implantation in these cases.

Effects of Cochlear Implantation on Binaural Hearing in Adults With Unilateral Hearing Loss

A FDA clinical trial was carried out to evaluate the potential benefit of cochlear implant (CI) use for adults with unilateral moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. Subjects were 20 adults with moderate-to-profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss and normal or near-normal hearing on the other side. A MED-EL standard electrode was implanted in the impaired ear. Outcome measures included: (a) sound localization on the horizontal plane (11 positions, -90° to 90°), (b) word recognition in quiet with the CI alone, and (c) masked sentence recognition with the target at 0° and the masker at -90°, 0°, or 90°. This battery was completed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after CI activation. Normative data were also collected for 20 age-matched control subjects with normal or near-normal hearing bilaterally. The CI improved localization accuracy and reduced side bias. Word recognition with the CI alone was similar to performance of traditional CI recipients. The CI improved masked sentence recognition when the masker was presented from the front or from the side of normal or near-normal hearing. The binaural benefits observed with the CI increased between the 1- and 3-month intervals but appeared stable thereafter. In contrast to previous reports on localization and speech perception in patients with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss, CI benefits were consistently observed across individual subjects, and performance was at asymptote by the 3-month test interval. Cochlear implant settings, consistent CI use, and short duration of deafness could play a role in this result.

Effects of Training on Lateralization for Simulations of Cochlear Implants and Single-Sided Deafness

While cochlear implantation has benefitted many patients with single-sided deafness (SSD), there is great variability in cochlear implant (CI) outcomes and binaural performance remains poorer than that of normal-hearing (NH) listeners. Differences in sound quality across ears-temporal fine structure (TFS) information with acoustic hearing vs. coarse spectro-temporal envelope information with electric hearing-may limit integration of acoustic and electric patterns. Binaural performance may also be limited by inter-aural mismatch between the acoustic input frequency and the place of stimulation in the cochlea. SSD CI patients must learn to accommodate these differences between acoustic and electric stimulation to maximize binaural performance. It is possible that training may increase and/or accelerate accommodation and further improve binaural performance. In this study, we evaluated lateralization training in NH subjects listening to broad simulations of SSD CI signal processing. A 16-channel vocoder was used to simulate the coarse spectro-temporal cues available with electric hearing; the degree of inter-aural mismatch was varied by adjusting the simulated insertion depth (SID) to be 25 mm (SID25), 22 mm (SID22) and 19 mm (SID19) from the base of the cochlea. Lateralization was measured using headphones and head-related transfer functions (HRTFs). Baseline lateralization was measured for unprocessed speech (UN) delivered to the left ear to simulate SSD and for binaural performance with the acoustic ear combined with the 16-channel vocoders (UN+SID25, UN+SID22 and UN+SID19). After completing baseline measurements, subjects completed six lateralization training exercises with the UN+SID22 condition, after which performance was re-measured for all baseline conditions. Post-training performance was significantly better than baseline for all conditions (p < 0.05 in all cases), with no significant difference in training benefits among conditions. Given that there was no significant difference between the SSD and the SSD CI conditions before or after training, the results suggest that NH listeners were unable to integrate TFS and coarse spectro-temporal cues across ears for lateralization, and that inter-aural mismatch played a secondary role at best. While lateralization training may benefit SSD CI patients, the training may largely improve spectral analysis with the acoustic ear alone, rather than improve integration of acoustic and electric hearing.

One-Year Results for Patients with Unilateral Hearing Loss and Accompanying Severe Tinnitus and Hyperacusis Treated with a Cochlear Implant

OBJECTIVE

To show that patients with unilateral hearing loss (UHL), with one ear fulfilling cochlear implant (CI) indication criteria, and an additional severe tinnitus handicap can be treated effectively with a CI.

METHOD

A prospective multi-centre study was conducted in five Spanish centres. Sixteen adult patients with UHL and a mean Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) score of at least 58 were implanted. The study design included repeated within-subject measures of quality of life (Health Utility Index Mark 3 [HUI3]), tinnitus (THI, Visual Analogue Scale [VAS] on tinnitus loudness), hearing (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale- [SSQ]), and hyperacusis (Test de Hipersensibilidad al Sonido [THS]) up to 12 months after the initial CI fitting.

RESULTS

Group data showed significant subjective benefit from CI treatment: the preoperative HUI3 total utility score of 0.45 went up to 0.57 at 6 months and 0.63 at 12 months; the preoperative THI total score of 75 decreased to 40 at 6 months and 35 at 12 months. The preoperative tinnitus loudness VAS score of 8.2 decreased to 2.4 at 6 months and 2.2 at 12 months with the implant "On" and to 6.7 at 6 months and 6.5 at 12 months with the implant "Off." The preoperative THS total score of 26 decreased to 17 at 12 months. The preoperative SSQ total score of 4.2 increased to 5.1 at 6 months and 6.3 at 12 months. No unanticipated adverse events were reported during the study period. At 12 months after CI activation all subjects (except 1 subject who used the device 6 days a week) wore their devices all day and every day. The primary reason for CI use was split evenly between tinnitus suppression (n = 6) and both hearing and tinnitus (n = 6).

CONCLUSION

A CI should be considered as a treatment option in patients with UHL and a concomitant severe tinnitus handicap. However, appropriate counselling of candidates on the anticipated risks, benefits, and limitations that are inherent to cochlear implantation is imperative.

Prospective Evaluation of Patients Undergoing Translabyrinthine Excision of Vestibular Schwannoma with Concurrent Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

Translabyrinthine (TL) vestibular schwannoma (VS) resection may be accomplished with preservation of the cochlear nerve, permitting successful, concurrent cochlear implantation. In this single institution, Food and Drug Administration-approved feasibility study, we wished to determine the success and outcomes of concurrent cochlear implantation at the time of TL resection of VS.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients with small VS less than 1.5 cm in size.

INTERVENTION

Concurrent TL VS resection and cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Sound localization and speech understanding.

RESULTS

All cochlear nerves were anatomically preserved. Five out of seven patients had auditory precepts at the time of activation. At 1 month following surgery, AzBio scores (0 dB SNR, with sound front, noise to normal ear) were improved by an average of 10% with implant on, persisting to 6 months out from surgery. Localization 1 month after surgery was markedly improved with root mean square 78 degrees ±13 in the "implant off" condition and 41 ± 9 degrees in the "implant on" condition. Average tinnitus severity was reduced in subjects and speech and spatial hearing was improved on speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate preservation of electrical hearing in TL VS surgery is consistently possible, and although speech outcomes do not achieve the same levels seen with other etiologies of hearing loss, excellent improvement in sound localization, improved speech understanding, and substantial reductions in tinnitus are achieved.

Simultaneous labyrinthectomy and cochlear implantation in unilateral meniere's disease

Objective

In a single‐institution, FDA‐approved IDE study, subjects with unilateral Meniere's disease and intractable vertigo underwent concurrent labyrinthectomy and cochlear implantation to determine speech perception, localization, and quality of life outcomes.

Methods

Three subjects with unilateral Meniere's disease with normal or near‐normal hearing in the contralateral ear underwent simultaneous labyrinthectomy and cochlear implantation. Sound localization, speech perception in noise and quiet, tinnitus handicap index, and quality of life measures were evaluated at 1, 3, and 6 months after implant activation.

Results

Sound localization testing demonstrated immediate benefit postimplantation with the cochlear implant (CI). RMS error with CI on was 22 degrees (±2) and with CI off was 63 (±15) at 6 months. Mean CI alone scores were 22% (±20) at 1 month and improved to 43% (±20) and 49% (±11) at the 3‐ and 6‐month intervals, respectively. AzBio sentences in babble (0 dB SNR) scores presented in the most challenging listening condition (S0NContra) were 28% (±20) at 1 month, 38% (±18) at 3 months, and 45% (±24) at 6 months. Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) significantly improved from an average preoperative score of 42 (±26) to 0 at 6 months. Quality of life measures improved overall over the postimplantation follow‐up intervals.

Conclusions

Subjects with unilateral Meniere's Disease who underwent simultaneous labyrinthectomy and cochlear implantation experienced improvements in sound localization, speech understanding, tinnitus severity, and quality of life with device use. There was a trend for better performance over the postoperative intervals.

Level of Evidence

2b.

Sound-localization performance of patients with single-sided deafness is not improved when listening with a bone-conduction device

An increased number of treatment options has become available for patients with single sided deafness (SSD), who are seeking hearing rehabilitation. For example, bone-conduction devices that employ contralateral routing of sound (CROS), by transmitting acoustic bone vibrations from the deaf side to the cochlea of the hearing ear, are widely used. However, in some countries, cochlear implantation is becoming the standard treatment. The present study investigated whether CROS intervention, by means of a CROS bone-conduction device (C-BCD), affected sound-localization performance of patients with SSD. Several studies have reported unexpected moderate to good unilateral sound-localization abilities in unaided SSD listeners. Listening with a C-BCD might deteriorate these localization abilities because sounds are transmitted, through bone conduction to the contralateral normal hearing ear, and could thus interfere with monaural level cues (i.e. ambiguous monaural head-shadow cues), or with the subtle spectral localization cues, on which the listener has learned to rely on. The present study included nineteen SSD patients who were using their C-BCD for more than five months. To assess the use of the different localization cues, we investigated their localization abilities to broadband (BB, 0.5-20 kHz), low-pass (LP, 0.5-1.5 kHz), and high-pass filtered noises (HP, 3-20 kHz) of varying intensities. Experiments were performed in complete darkness, by measuring orienting head-movement responses under open-loop localization conditions. We demonstrate that a minority of listeners with SSD (5 out of 19) could localize BB and HP (but not LP) sounds in the horizontal plane in the unaided condition, and that a C-BCD did not deteriorate their localization abilities.

Restoration of spatial hearing in adult cochlear implant users with single-sided deafness

In recent years, cochlear implants (CIs) have been provided in growing numbers to people with not only bilateral deafness but also to people with unilateral hearing loss, at times in order to alleviate tinnitus. This study presents audiological data from 15 adult participants (ages 48 ± 12 years) with single sided deafness. Results are presented from 9/15 adults, who received a CI (SSD-CI) in the deaf ear and were tested in Acoustic or Acoustic + CI hearing modes, and 6/15 adults who are planning to receive a CI, and were tested in the unilateral condition only. Testing included (1) audiometric measures of threshold, (2) speech understanding for CNC words and AzBIO sentences, (3) tinnitus handicap inventory, (4) sound localization with stationary sound sources, and (5) perceived auditory motion. Results showed that when listening to sentences in quiet, performance was excellent in the Acoustic and Acoustic + CI conditions. In noise, performance was similar between Acoustic and Acoustic + CI conditions in 4/6 participants tested, and slightly worse in the Acoustic + CI in 2/6 participants. In some cases, the CI provided reduced tinnitus handicap scores. When testing sound localization ability, the Acoustic + CI condition resulted in improved sound localization RMS error of 29.2° (SD: ±6.7°) compared to 56.6° (SD: ±16.5°) in the Acoustic-only condition. Preliminary results suggest that the perception of motion direction, whereby subjects are required to process and compare directional cues across multiple locations, is impaired when compared with that of normal hearing subjects.

Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Quality of Life in Adults with Unilateral Hearing Loss

Objective: Patients with moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in 1 ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear, known as unilateral hearing loss (UHL) or single-sided deafness (SSD), may experience improved quality of life with the use of a cochlear implant (CI) in the affected ear. Quality of life assessment before and after implantation may reveal changes to aspects of hearing beyond those explicitly evaluated with behavioral measures. Methods: The present report completed 2 experiments investigating quality of life outcomes in CI recipients with UHL. The first experiment assessed quality of life during the 1st year of device use with 3 questionnaires: the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. Twenty subjects were evaluated preoperatively and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-activation. Quality of life results were compared over the study period using traditional scoring methods and the SSQ pragmatic subscales. Subscales specific to localization and speech perception in noise were compared to behavioral measures at the preoperative and 12-month intervals. The 2nd experiment evaluated quality of life preoperatively and at the 12-month interval for CI recipients with UHL and CI recipients with bilateral hearing loss, including conventional CI users and those listening with electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). The 3 cohorts differed in CI candidacy criteria, including the amount of residual hearing in the contralateral ear. Results: For subjects with moderate-to-profound UHL, receipt of a CI significantly improved quality of life, with benefits noted as early as 1 month after initial activation. The UHL cohort reported less perceived difficulty at the pre- and postoperative intervals than the conventional CI and EAS cohorts, which may be due to the presence of the normal-hearing ear. Each group experienced a significant benefit in quality of life on the APHAB with CI use. Conclusions: Cochlear implantation in cases of substantial UHL may offer significant improvements in quality of life. Quality of life measures revealed a reduction in perceived tinnitus severity and subjective improvements in speech perception in noise, spatial hearing, and listening effort. While self-report of difficulties were lower for the UHL cohort than the conventional CI and EAS cohorts, subjects in all 3 groups reported an improvement in quality of life with CI use.