Multicenter U.S. Bilateral MED-EL Cochlear Implantation Study: Speech Perception over the First Year of Use

CROS or hearing aid? Selecting the ideal solution for unilateral CI patients with limited aidable hearing in the contralateral ear

A hearing aid or a contralateral routing of signal device are options for unilateral cochlear implant listeners with limited hearing in the unimplanted ear; however, it is uncertain which device provides greater benefit beyond unilateral listening alone. Eighteen unilateral cochlear implant listeners participated in this prospective, within-participants, repeated measures study. Participants were tested with the cochlear implant alone, cochlear implant + hearing aid, and cochlear implant + contralateral routing of signal device configurations with a one-month take-home period between each in-person visit. Audiograms, speech perception in noise, and lateralization were evaluated. Subjective feedback was obtained via questionnaires. Marked improvement in speech in noise and non-implanted ear lateralization accuracy were observed with the addition of a contralateral hearing aid. There were no significant differences in speech recognition between listening configurations. However, the chronic device use questionnaires and the final device selection showed a clear preference for the hearing aid in spatial awareness and communication domains. Individuals with limited hearing in their unimplanted ears demonstrate significant improvement with the addition of a contralateral device. Subjective questionnaires somewhat contrast with clinic-based outcome measures, highlighting the delicate decision-making process involved in clinically advising one device or another to maximize communication benefits.

Cochlear Implant Upper Stimulation Levels: eSRT vs. Loudness Scaling

OBJECTIVE

To assess the difference in speech recognition and sound quality between programming upper stimulation levels using behavioral measures (loudness scaling) and electrically evoked stapedial reflex thresholds (eSRTs).

STUDY DESIGN

Double-blinded acute comparison study.

SETTING

Cochlear implant (CI) program at a tertiary medical center.

PATIENTS

Eighteen adult (mean age = 60 years) CI users and 20 ears.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Speech recognition scores and sound quality ratings.

RESULTS

Mean word and sentence in noise recognition scores were 8 and 9 percentage points higher, respectively, for the eSRT-based map. The sound quality rating was 1.4 points higher for the eSRT-based map. Sixteen out of 20 participants preferred the eSRT-based map.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results show significantly higher speech recognition and more favorable sound quality using an eSRT-based map compared with a loudness-scaling map using a double-blinded testing approach. Additionally, results may be understated as 18 of 20 ears had eSRTs measured before study enrollment. Results underscore the importance of incorporating eSRTs into standard clinical practice to promote best outcomes for CI recipients.

Assessment of Binaural Benefits in Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to (a) investigate which speech material is most appropriate as stimulus in head shadow effect (HSE) and binaural squelch (SQ) tests, (b) obtain normative values of both tests using the material decided to be optimal, and (c) explore the results in bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users.

METHOD

Study participants consisted of 30 normal-hearing (NH) persons and 34 bilateral CI users. This study consisted of three phases. In the first phase, three different speech materials (1) monosyllabic words, (2) spondee words, and (3) sentences were compared in terms of (a) effect size, (b) test-retest reliability, and (c) interindividual variability. In the second phase, the speech material selected in the first phase was used to test a further 24 NHs to obtain normative values for both tests. In the third phase, tests were administered to a further 23 bilateral CI users, together with localization test and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale.

RESULTS

The results of the first phase indicated that spondees and sentences were more robust materials compared with monosyllables. Although the effect size and interindividual variability were comparable for spondees and sentences, sentences had higher test-retest reliability in this sample of CI users. With sentences, the mean (± standard deviation) HSE and SQ in the NH group were 58 ± 14% and 22 ± 11%, respectively. In the CI group, the mean HSE and SQ were 49 ± 13% and 13 ± 14%, respectively. There were no statistically significant correlations between the test results and the interval between the implantations, the length of binaural listening experience, or the asymmetry between the ears.

CONCLUSIONS

Sentences are preferred as stimulus material in the binaural HSE and SQ tests. Normative data are given for HSE and SQ with the LiCoS (linguistically controlled sentences) test. HSE is present for all bilateral CI users, whereas SQ is present in approximately seven out of 10 cases.

Computed-Tomography Estimates of Interaural Mismatch in Insertion Depth and Scalar Location in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users

HYPOTHESIS

Bilateral cochlear-implant (BI-CI) users will have a range of interaural insertion-depth mismatch because of different array placement or characteristics. Mismatch will be larger for electrodes located near the apex or outside scala tympani, or for arrays that are a mix of precurved and straight types.

BACKGROUND

Brainstem superior olivary-complex neurons are exquisitely sensitive to interaural-difference cues for sound localization. Because these neurons rely on interaurally place-of-stimulation-matched inputs, interaural insertion-depth or scalar-location differences for BI-CI users could cause interaural place-of-stimulation mismatch that impairs binaural abilities.

METHODS

Insertion depths and scalar locations were calculated from temporal-bone computed-tomography scans for 107 BI-CI users (27 Advanced Bionics, 62 Cochlear, 18 MED-EL).

RESULTS

Median interaural insertion-depth mismatch was 23.4 degrees or 1.3 mm. Mismatch in the estimated clinically relevant range expected to impair binaural processing (>75 degrees or 3 mm) occurred for 13 to 19% of electrode pairs overall, and for at least three electrode pairs for 23 to 37% of subjects. There was a significant three-way interaction between insertion depth, scalar location, and array type. Interaural insertion-depth mismatch was largest for apical electrodes, for electrode pairs in two different scala, and for arrays that were both-precurved.

CONCLUSION

Average BI-CI interaural insertion-depth mismatch was small; however, large interaural insertion-depth mismatch-with the potential to degrade spatial hearing-occurred frequently enough to warrant attention. For new BICI users, improved surgical techniques to avoid interaural insertion-depth and scalar mismatch are recommended. For existing BI-CI users with interaural insertion-depth mismatch, interaural alignment of clinical frequency tables might reduce negative spatial-hearing consequences.

Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults Using Bimodal Hearing Configurations

Clinics are treating a growing number of patients with greater amounts of residual hearing. These patients often benefit from a bimodal hearing configuration in which acoustic input from a hearing aid on 1 ear is combined with electrical stimulation from a cochlear implant on the other ear. The current guidelines aim to review the literature and provide best practice recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of individuals with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who may benefit from bimodal hearing configurations. Specifically, the guidelines review: benefits of bimodal listening, preoperative and postoperative cochlear implant evaluation and programming, bimodal hearing aid fitting, contralateral routing of signal considerations, bimodal treatment for tinnitus, and aural rehabilitation recommendations.

Relationships Between Health-Related Quality of Life and Speech Perception in Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users

Purpose

Previous studies examining the relationship between health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and speech perception ability in cochlear implant (CI) users have yielded variable results, due to a range of factors, such as a variety of different HRQoL questionnaires and CI speech testing materials in addition to CI configuration. In order to decrease inherent variability and better understand the relationship between these measures in CI users, we administered a commonly used clinical CI speech testing battery as well as two popular HRQoL questionnaires in bimodal and bilateral CI users.

Methods

The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), a modified five-factor version of the GBI (GBI-5F), and the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) were administered to 25 CI users (17 bimodal and 8 bilateral). Speech perception abilities were measured with the AzBio sentence test in several conditions (e.g., quiet and noise, binaural, and first-ear CI only).

Results

Higher performance scores on the GBI general subscore were related to greater binaural speech perception ability in noise. There were no other relationships between the GBI or NCIQ and speech perception ability under any condition. Scores on many of the GBI-5F factors were substantially skewed and asymmetrical; therefore, correlational analyses could not be applied. Across all participants, binaural speech perception scores were greater than first-ear CI only scores.

Conclusion

The GBI general subscore was related to binaural speech perception, which is considered the everyday listening condition of bimodal and bilateral CI users, in noise; while the more CI-specific NCIQ did not relate to speech perception ability in any listening condition. Future research exploring the relationships between the GBI, GBI-5F, and NCIQ considering bimodal and bilateral CI configurations separately is warranted.

Novel Approaches to Measure Spatial Release From Masking in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the role of auditory cues for spatial release from masking (SRM) in children with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) and compare their performance with children with normal hearing (NH). To quantify the contribution to speech intelligibility benefits from individual auditory cues: head shadow, binaural redundancy, and interaural differences; as well as from multiple cues: SRM and binaural squelch. To assess SRM using a novel approach of adaptive target-masker angular separation, which provides a more functionally relevant assessment in realistic complex auditory environments.

DESIGN

Children fitted with BiCIs (N = 11) and with NH (N = 18) were tested in virtual acoustic space that was simulated using head-related transfer functions measured from individual children with BiCIs behind the ear and from a standard head and torso simulator for all NH children. In experiment I, by comparing speech reception thresholds across 4 test conditions that varied in target-masker spatial separation (colocated versus separated at 180°) and listening conditions (monaural versus binaural/bilateral listening), intelligibility benefits were derived for individual auditory cues for SRM. In experiment II, SRM was quantified using a novel measure to find the minimum angular separation (MAS) between the target and masker to achieve a fixed 20% intelligibility improvement. Target speech was fixed at either +90 or -90° azimuth on the side closer to the better ear (+90° for all NH children) and masker locations were adaptively varied.

RESULTS

In experiment I, children with BiCIs as a group had smaller intelligibility benefits from head shadow than NH children. No group difference was observed in benefits from binaural redundancy or interaural difference cues. In both groups of children, individuals who gained a larger benefit from interaural differences relied less on monaural head shadow, and vice versa. In experiment II, all children with BiCIs demonstrated measurable MAS thresholds <180° and on average larger than that from NH children. Eight of 11 children with BiCIs and all NH children had a MAS threshold <90°, requiring interaural differences only to gain the target intelligibility benefit; whereas the other 3 children with BiCIs had a MAS between 120° and 137°, requiring monaural head shadow for SRM.

CONCLUSIONS

When target and maskers were separated at 180° on opposing hemifields, children with BiCIs demonstrated greater intelligibility benefits from head shadow and interaural differences than previous literature showed with a smaller separation. Children with BiCIs demonstrated individual differences in using auditory cues for SRM. From the MAS thresholds, more than half of the children with BiCIs demonstrated robust access to interaural differences without needing additional monaural head shadow for SRM. Both experiments led to the conclusion that individualized fitting strategies in the bilateral devices may be warranted to maximize spatial hearing for children with BiCIs in complex auditory environments.

Evaluation of a New Bone Conduction Device for the Rehabilitation of Single-Sided Deafness: Effects on Speech Understanding in Noise

INTRODUCTION

A new external, adhesive, no-pressure bone-conduction device provides rehabilitation for conductive hearing loss and single-sided deafness (SSD). The purpose of the study is to evaluate speech recognition performance with the bone-conduction contralateral routing of signal (aBC-CROS) and compare it to an air-conduction CROS (AC-CROS) used by subjects for at least 1 year.

METHODS

Ten SSD patients underwent speech understanding in noise tests with their AC-CROS, the aBC-CROS, and unaided. The 1st test session took place the day the aBC-CROS was fitted, with the second session after 2 weeks of aBC-CROS use. Two configurations were used: speech presented on the deaf side and noise on the normal side and the reverse.

RESULTS

The speech recognition threshold (SRT) improved with both devices when speech was presented to the deaf side. Nine patients showed significant improvement (p < 0.016) with the AC-CROS (mean: 2.8 dB) and the aBC-CROS (mean: 3.0 dB). Mean difference of improvement was significant between unaided and aBC-CROS (p = 0.001) or AC-CROS (p = 0.006). The SRT deteriorated by an average of 2.3 dB with the AC-CROS with noise presented on the deaf side, with significance found for six patients (p < 0.016). The aBC-CROS did not affect performance in this configuration (mean improvement: 0.3 dB) and only one patient had a significant SRT degradation (p < 0.016). Mean difference of improvement was significant between the AC-CROS and aBC-CROS (p = 0.021) or unaided (p = 0.05).

DISCUSSION

The aBC-CROS is a good alternative to the existing CROS devices for SSD rehabilitation, as it offers the same benefit with none of the drawbacks when noise is on the patient's deaf side.

Pitch Accuracy of Vocal Singing in Deaf Children With Bimodal Hearing and Bilateral Cochlear Implants

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the pitch accuracy of vocal singing in children with severe to profound hearing loss who use bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) or bimodal devices [CI at one ear and hearing aid (HA) at the other] in comparison to similarly-aged children with normal-hearing (NH).

DESIGN

The participants included four groups: (1) 26 children with NH, (2) 13 children with bimodal devices, (3) 31 children with bilateral CIs that were implanted sequentially, and (4) 10 children with bilateral CIs that were implanted simultaneously. All participants were aged between 7 and 11 years old. Each participant was recorded singing a self-chosen song that was familiar to him or her. The fundamental frequencies (F0) of individual sung notes were extracted and normalized to facilitate cross-subject comparisons. Pitch accuracy was quantified using four pitch-based metrics calculated with reference to the target music notes: mean note deviation, contour direction, mean interval deviation, and F0 variance ratio. A one-way ANOVA was used to compare listener-group difference on each pitch metric. A principal component analysis showed that the mean note deviation best accounted for pitch accuracy in vocal singing. A regression analysis examined potential predictors of CI children's singing proficiency using mean note deviation as the dependent variable and demographic and audiological factors as independent variables.

RESULTS

The results revealed significantly poorer performance on all four pitch-based metrics in the three groups of children with CIs in comparison to children with NH. No significant differences were found among the three CI groups. Among the children with CIs, variability in the vocal singing proficiency was large. Within the group of 13 bimodal users, the mean note deviation was significantly correlated with their unaided pure-tone average thresholds (r = 0.582, p = 0.037). The regression analysis for all children with CIs, however, revealed no significant demographic or audiological predictor for their vocal singing performance.

CONCLUSION

Vocal singing performance in children with bilateral CIs or bimodal devices is not significantly different from each other on a group level. Compared to children with NH, the pediatric bimodal and bilateral CI users, in general, demonstrated significant deficits in vocal singing ability. Demographic and audiological factors, known from previous studies to be associated with good speech and language development in prelingually-deafened children with CIs, were not associated with singing accuracy for these children.

Effect of Increased Daily Cochlear Implant Use on Auditory Perception in Adults

Purpose Despite the recommendation for cochlear implant (CI) processor use during all waking hours, variability in average daily wear time remains high. Previous work has shown that objective wear time is significantly correlated with speech recognition outcomes. We aimed to investigate the causal link between daily wear time and speech recognition outcomes and assess one potential underlying mechanism, spectral processing, driving the causal link. We hypothesized that increased CI use would result in improved speech recognition via improved spectral processing. Method Twenty adult CI recipients completed two study visits. The baseline visit included auditory perception testing (speech recognition and spectral processing measures), questionnaire administration, and documentation of data logging from the CI software. Participants watched an educational video, and they were informed of the compensation schedule. Participants were then asked to increase their daily CI use over a 4-week period during everyday life. Baseline measures were reassessed following the 4-week period. Results Seventeen out of 20 participants increased their daily CI use. On average, participants' speech recognition improved by 3.0, 2.4, and 7.0 percentage points per hour of increased average daily CI use for consonant-nucleus-consonant words, AzBio sentences, and AzBio sentences in noise, respectively. Questionnaire scores were similar between visits. Spectral processing showed significant improvement and accounted for a small amount of variance in the change in speech recognition values. Conclusions Improved consistency of processor use over a 4-week period yielded significant improvements in speech recognition scores. Though a significant factor, spectral processing is likely not the only mechanism driving improvement in speech recognition; further research is warranted.

Speech-in-Noise Recognition With More Realistic Implementations of a Binaural Cochlear-Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Medial Olivocochlear Reflex

OBJECTIVES

Cochlear implant (CI) users continue to struggle understanding speech in noisy environments with current clinical devices. We have previously shown that this outcome can be improved by using binaural sound processors inspired by the medial olivocochlear (MOC) reflex, which involve dynamic (contralaterally controlled) rather than fixed compressive acoustic-to-electric maps. The present study aimed at investigating the potential additional benefits of using more realistic implementations of MOC processing.

DESIGN

Eight users of bilateral CIs and two users of unilateral CIs participated in the study. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for sentences in competition with steady state noise were measured in unilateral and bilateral listening modes. Stimuli were processed through two independently functioning sound processors (one per ear) with fixed compression, the current clinical standard (STD); the originally proposed MOC strategy with fast contralateral control of compression (MOC1); a MOC strategy with slower control of compression (MOC2); and a slower MOC strategy with comparatively greater contralateral inhibition in the lower-frequency than in the higher-frequency channels (MOC3). Performance with the four strategies was compared for multiple simulated spatial configurations of the speech and noise sources. Based on a previously published technical evaluation of these strategies, we hypothesized that SRTs would be overall better (lower) with the MOC3 strategy than with any of the other tested strategies. In addition, we hypothesized that the MOC3 strategy would be advantageous over the STD strategy in listening conditions and spatial configurations where the MOC1 strategy was not.

RESULTS

In unilateral listening and when the implant ear had the worse acoustic signal-to-noise ratio, the mean SRT was 4 dB worse for the MOC1 than for the STD strategy (as expected), but it became equal or better for the MOC2 or MOC3 strategies than for the STD strategy. In bilateral listening, mean SRTs were 1.6 dB better for the MOC3 strategy than for the STD strategy across all spatial configurations tested, including a condition with speech and noise sources colocated at front where the MOC1 strategy was slightly disadvantageous relative to the STD strategy. All strategies produced significantly better SRTs for spatially separated than for colocated speech and noise sources. A statistically significant binaural advantage (i.e., better mean SRTs across spatial configurations and participants in bilateral than in unilateral listening) was found for the MOC2 and MOC3 strategies but not for the STD or MOC1 strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, performance was best with the MOC3 strategy, which maintained the benefits of the originally proposed MOC1 strategy over the STD strategy for spatially separated speech and noise sources and extended those benefits to additional spatial configurations. In addition, the MOC3 strategy provided a significant binaural advantage, which did not occur with the STD or the original MOC1 strategies.

Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Children: Long-Term Outcome in the Adult Population With Special Emphasis on the Bilateral Benefit

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the benefit of bilateral cochlear implantation in adults, who had been implanted being a child under the age of 10 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective data analysis.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center with a large cochlear implant program.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Speech understanding in the Freiburg monosyllabic words in quiet and the HSM sentence test in quiet and in background noise.

PATIENTS

Seventy-seven bilaterally cochlear implantation implanted adults.

RESULTS

Bilateral cochlear implantation in children under the age of 10 years results in a significant benefit in speech comprehension in adulthood. In addition, a dependency regarding the time between the implantations and speech intelligibility was found.

CONCLUSION

The results emphasize the benefit of bilateral cochlear implantation with a short interval between the operations in young children not only during formative years but also in adulthood.

Benefits of triple acoustic beamforming during speech-on-speech masking and sound localization for bilateral cochlear-implant users

Bilateral cochlear-implant (CI) users struggle to understand speech in noisy environments despite receiving some spatial-hearing benefits. One potential solution is to provide acoustic beamforming. A headphone-based experiment was conducted to compare speech understanding under natural CI listening conditions and for two non-adaptive beamformers, one single beam and one binaural, called "triple beam," which provides an improved signal-to-noise ratio (beamforming benefit) and usable spatial cues by reintroducing interaural level differences. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for speech-on-speech masking were measured with target speech presented in front and two maskers in co-located or narrow/wide separations. Numerosity judgments and sound-localization performance also were measured. Natural spatial cues, single-beam, and triple-beam conditions were compared. For CI listeners, there was a negligible change in SRTs when comparing co-located to separated maskers for natural listening conditions. In contrast, there were 4.9- and 16.9-dB improvements in SRTs for the beamformer and 3.5- and 12.3-dB improvements for triple beam (narrow and wide separations). Similar results were found for normal-hearing listeners presented with vocoded stimuli. Single beam improved speech-on-speech masking performance but yielded poor sound localization. Triple beam improved speech-on-speech masking performance, albeit less than the single beam, and sound localization. Thus, triple beam was the most versatile across multiple spatial-hearing domains.

Duration of Processor Use Per Day Is Significantly Correlated With Speech Recognition Abilities in Adults With Cochlear Implants

OBJECTIVE

Quantify the relationship between average hours of processor use per day and measures of speech recognition in post-lingually deafened adults with cochlear implants.

SETTING

Cochlear implant (CI) program at a tertiary medical center.

PATIENTS

Three hundred adult (mean age = 64, 130 women) CI users were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Correlation analyses were completed for CI-aided speech recognition (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant [CNC] monosyllables and AzBio sentences) at approximately 12 months post-implantation and average hours of processor use per day, which was extracted from the CI programming software.

RESULTS

Average processor use was 10.2 hours per day (range, 0.1-22.7), and average speech recognition scores were 49.9 and 61.7% for CNC and AzBio sentence recognition, respectively. We found a strong, significant correlation between hours of processor use per day and consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) word recognition (rs = 0.61, p < 0.0001) and AzBio sentence recognition (rs = 0.56, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that highest speech recognition outcomes are correlated with greater than 10 hours of CI use per day. Further research is needed to assess the causal link between daily CI use and speech recognition abilities.

On the importance of interaural noise coherence and the medial olivocochlear reflex for binaural unmasking in free-field listening

For speech in competition with a noise source in the free field, normal-hearing (NH) listeners recognize speech better when listening binaurally than when listening monaurally with the ear that has the better acoustic signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). This benefit from listening binaurally is known as binaural unmasking and indicates that the brain combines information from the two ears to improve intelligibility. Here, we address three questions pertaining to binaural unmasking for NH listeners. First, we investigate if binaural unmasking results from combining the speech and/or the noise from the two ears. In a simulated acoustic free field with speech and noise sources at 0° and 270°azimuth, respectively, we found comparable unmasking regardless of whether the speech was present or absent in the ear with the worse SNR. This indicates that binaural unmasking probably involves combining only the noise at the two ears. Second, we investigate if having binaurally coherent location cues for the noise signal is sufficient for binaural unmasking to occur. We found no unmasking when location cues were coherent but noise signals were generated incoherent or were processed unilaterally through a hearing aid with linear, minimal amplification. This indicates that binaural unmasking requires interaurally coherent noise signals, source location cues, and processing. Third, we investigate if the hypothesized antimasking benefits of the medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR) contribute to binaural unmasking. We found comparable unmasking regardless of whether speech tokens (words) were sufficiently delayed from the noise onset to fully activate the MOCR or not. Moreover, unmasking was absent when the noise was binaurally incoherent whereas the physiological antimasking effects of the MOCR are similar for coherent and incoherent noises. This indicates that the MOCR is unlikely involved in binaural unmasking.

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.

Bilateral cochlear implantation

Binaural hearing has certain benefits while listening in noisy environments. It provides the listeners with access to time, level and spectral differences between sound signals, perceived by the two ears. However, single sided deaf (SSD) or unilateral cochlear implant (CI) users cannot experience these binaural benefits due to the acoustic input coming from a single ear. The translational research on bilateral CIs started in the year 1998, initiated by J. Müller and J. Helms from Würzburg, Germany in association with MED-EL. Since then, several clinical studies were conducted by different research groups from across the world either independently or in collaboration with MED-EL. As a result, the bilateral CI has become the standard of care in many countries along with reimbursement by the health care systems. Recent data shows that children particularly, are given high priority for the bilateral CI implantation, most often performed simultaneously in a single surgery, as the binaural hearing has a positive effect on their language development. This article covers the milestones of translational research from the first concept to the widespread clinical use of bilateral CI.

Spatial Release From Informational and Energetic Masking in Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users

Purpose Spatially separating speech and background noise improves speech understanding in normal-hearing listeners, an effect referred to as spatial release from masking (SRM). In cochlear implant (CI) users, SRM has often been demonstrated using asymmetric noise configurations, which maximize benefit from head shadow and the potential availability of binaural cues. In contrast, SRM in symmetrical configurations has been minimal to absent in CI users. We examined the interaction between two types of maskers (informational and energetic) and SRM in bimodal and bilateral CI users. We hypothesized that SRM would be absent or "negative" using symmetrically separated noise maskers. Second, we hypothesized that bimodal listeners would exhibit greater release from informational masking due to access to acoustic information in the non-CI ear. Method Participants included 10 bimodal and 10 bilateral CI users. Speech understanding in noise was tested in 24 conditions: 3 spatial configurations (S₀N₀, S₀N_45&315, S₀N_90&270) × 2 masker types (speech, signal-correlated noise) × 2 listening configurations (best-aided, CI-alone) × 2 talker gender conditions (different-gender, same-gender). Results In support of our first hypothesis, both groups exhibited negative SRM with increasing spatial separation. In opposition to our second hypothesis, both groups exhibited similar magnitudes of release from informational masking. The magnitude of release was greater for bimodal listeners, though this difference failed to reach statistical significance. Conclusions Both bimodal and bilateral CI recipients exhibited negative SRM. This finding is consistent with CI signal processing limitations, the audiologic factors associated with SRM, and known effects of behind-the-ear microphone technology. Though release from informational masking was not significantly different across groups, the magnitude of release was greater for bimodal listeners. This suggests that bimodal listeners may be at least marginally more susceptible to informational masking than bilateral CI users, though further research is warranted.

Assessment of Angular Insertion-Depth of Bilateral Cochlear Implants Using Plain X-ray Scans

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate in cochlear implant patients, the feasibility and reliability of angular depth of insertion (aDOI) measurements using plain x-ray scans.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study where three observers independently evaluated and compared intraoperative anterior-posterior and oblique x-ray scans.

SETTING

A tertiary pediatric medical center.

PATIENTS

Included were 50 children (100 ears) who underwent bilateral simultaneous cochlear implantation during 2008 to 2015.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Inter-rater agreement of aDOI measured in plain x-ray scans; effect of head position on measured aDOI; and symmetry of aDOI between patients' ears in bilateral simultaneous cochlear implantations.

RESULTS

Differences in the average aDOI measurements among the three observers ranged between 2 and 7 degrees. There was high inter-rater agreement (R = 0.99, p < 0.01) among all observers, and strong correlations between each pair of observers (0.92-0.99). Head rotation of 45 degrees (between the two views) resulted in a median difference in aDOI of 14 degrees, with excellent correlation among the observers. The rate of asymmetry was high, with a median difference of 39 degrees and up to 220 degrees between ears.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of aDOI using intraoperative plain x-rays is efficient and reliable. The effect of head positioning on measurement is small. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of aDOI and insertion symmetry on functional outcomes.

Insertion Depth for Optimized Positioning of Precurved Cochlear Implant Electrodes

HYPOTHESIS

Generic guidelines for insertion depth of precurved electrodes are suboptimal for many individuals.

BACKGROUND

Insertion depths that are too shallow result in decreased cochlear coverage, and ones that are too deep lift electrodes away from the modiolus and degrade the electro-neural interface. Guidelines for insertion depth are generically applied to all individuals using insertion depth markers on the array that can be referenced against anatomical landmarks.

METHODS

To normalize our measurements, we determined the optimal position and insertion vector where a precurved array best fits the cochlea for each patient in an IRB-approved, N = 131 subject CT database. The distances from the most basal electrode on an optimally placed array to anatomical landmarks, including the round window (RW) and facial recess (FR), was measured for all patients.

RESULTS

The standard deviations of the distance from the most basal electrode to the FR and RW are 0.65 mm and 0.26 mm, respectively. Owing to the high variability in FR distance, using the FR as a landmark to determine insertion depth results in >0.5 mm difference with ideal depth in 44% of cases. Alignment of either of the two most proximal RW markers with the RW would result in over-insertion failures for >80% of cases, whereas the use of the third, most medial marker would result in under-insertion in only 19% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Normalized measurements using the optimized insertion vector show low variance in distance from the basal electrode position to the RW, thereby suggesting it as a better landmark for determining insertion depth than the FR.

Factors Influencing Pediatric Cochlear Implant Outcomes: Carolina Sibling Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the correlation between speech perception performance between pediatric sibling pairs with severe to profound sensory hearing loss receiving cochlear implants, and in cases of discordance in performance, determine which variables negatively impacted performance.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Tertiary academic referral center.

SUBJECTS

Eighty-nine pediatric subjects, 43 sibling groups, under the age of 18 with severe to profound sensory hearing loss who received a cochlear implant with a sibling who also received a cochlear implant.

INTERVENTION

Cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Speech perception scores, consonant-nucleus- consonant score.

RESULTS

A statistically significant correlation was found between speech perception performance of pediatric siblings. Depth of insertion is positively correlated with better speech perception in siblings with discordant results. There was no significant relationship with either electrode type, unilateral/bilateral status, or age of implantation.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric siblings have a high correlation in speech perception outcomes following cochlear implantation, suggesting family environment plays a strong role. In circumstances in which outcomes between siblings are substantially different, greater depth of implant insertion is correlated with better consonant-nucleus- consonant word scores.

Absence of Rhythm Benefit on Speech in Noise Recognition in Children Diagnosed With Auditory Processing Disorder

Auditory processing disorder (APD) is a specific deficit in the processing of auditory information along the central auditory nervous system. It is characterized mainly by deficits in speech in noise recognition. APD children may also present with deficits in processing of auditory rhythm. Rhythmic neural entrainment is commonly present in perception of both speech and music, while auditory rhythmic priming of speech in noise has been known to enhance recognition in typical children. Here, we test the hypothesis that the effect of rhythmic priming is compromised in APD children, and further assessed for correlations with verbal and non-verbal auditory processing and cognition. Forty APD children and 33 neurotypical ones were assessed through (a) WRRC, a test measuring the effects of rhythmic priming on speech in noise recognition, (b) a battery of auditory processing tests, commonly used in APD diagnosis, and (c) two cognitive tests, assessing working memory and auditory attention respectively. Findings revealed that (a) the effect of rhythmic priming on speech in noise recognition is absent in APD children, (b) it is linked to non-verbal auditory processing, and (c) it is only weakly dependent on cognition. We discuss these findings in light of Dynamic Attention Theory, neural entrainment and neural oscillations and suggest that these functions may be compromised in APD children. Further research is needed (a) to explore the nature of the mechanics of rhythmic priming on speech in noise perception and why the effect is absent in APD children, (b) which other mechanisms related to both rhythm and language are also affected in this population, and (c) whether music/rhythm training can restore deficits in rhythm effects.

Application of Wireless Contralateral Routing of Signal (CROS) Technology in Unilateral Cochlear Implant Users

INTRODUCTION

Single cochlear implantation usually provides substantial speech intelligibility benefits but bilaterally deaf, unilaterally implanted subjects will continue to experience limitations due to the head shadow effect, like single-sided deaf individuals. In the treatment of individuals with single-sided deafness one option is contralateral routing of signal (CROS) devices, which constitute a non-surgical intervention of the second ear in unilaterally implanted individuals.

METHOD

Twelve experienced adult cochlear implant users with Naída Q70 processor and the CROS device used in combination participated in the study. For the study 3 conditions were provided: cochlear implant only, omnidirectional microphone mode (CROS deactivated); cochlear implant plus CROS activated, omnidirectional microphone mode and cochlear implant plus CROS activated, UltraZoom mode. Speech reception thresholds were determined in quiet and noise. Subjective feedback regarding the practical usability of the CROS device and the perceived benefit were collected.

RESULTS

There was a 27.6% improvement in speech understanding in quiet and 32.5% improvement in noise when CROS device was activated. Using advanced directional microphones, a statistically significant benefit of 35% was obtained. The responses to the questionnaires revealed that the subjects perceived benefit in their everyday lives when using the CROS device with their cochlear implants.

CONCLUSION

The investigated CROS device used by unilateral CI recipients in cases where bilateral implantation is not an option provides both subjective and objective speech recognition benefit when the signal is directed to the CROS device. Unfavourable conditions where speech is presented from the cochlear implant side and noise from the CROS side or diffusely were not included in this evaluation since the CROS device adds additional noise and performance is expected to decrease as has previously been shown.

Association of Demographic and Hearing-Related Factors With Cochlear Implant-Related Quality of Life

Importance

Only limited evidence is available describing the contribution of patient-related factors to quality of life in adults with cochlear implants.

Objective

Assess the association between demographic, hearing-related, and cochlear implant-related factors and quality of life by using a new Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL) item bank, which was developed to meet rigorous psychometric standards.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Multicenter cross-sectional study of adults 18 to 89 years of age who had at least 1 year of cochlear implant use and who were recruited through a consortium of 20 cochlear implant centers in the United States. Using an online format, questionnaires were sent to the first 500 participants who contacted the research team. Of these participants, 371 (74.2%) completed the questionnaire. Demographic, hearing-related, and cochlear implant-related data were obtained along with responses to each of the 81 items in the CIQOL item bank. Multivariable linear regression was used to examine demographic, hearing-related, and cochlear implant-related factors associated with scores in each of the 6 CIQOL domains (communication, emotional, entertainment, environment, listening effort, and social).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Association among demographic, hearing-related, and cochlear implant-related factors and CIQOL scores for each of 6 domains.

Results

Of the 371 participants who completed the questionnaire, 222 (59.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 59.5 (14.9) years. The CIQOL scores were normally distributed across the 6 domains. Being employed, having higher household income, longer duration of hearing loss prior to cochlear implantation, and having bilateral rather than unilateral cochlear implantation were associated with higher CIQOL scores in 1 or more domains, but the effect size varied widely (β, 0.1-6.9). Better sentence recognition ability (using AzBio to measure speech recognition) was associated with only a small positive effect size for the communication (β, 0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.1]), entertainment (β, 0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.1]), and environmental (β, 0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.0]) domains. Increased age was associated with lower CIQOL in the entertainment domain (β, -0.3 [95% CI, -1.5 to -0.4]). The demographic, hearing-related, and cochlear implant-related factors included in the multivariable regression models accounted for only a small percentage of the variance in CIQOL domain scores (R2, 0.08-0.17).

Conclusions and Relevance

Several factors were found to predict higher or lower CIQOL scores in specific domains, with speech-recognition ability having only a minimal association. Despite evaluating a large number of demographic, hearing-related, and cochlear implant-related factors, the multivariable models accounted for only a small amount of CIQOL variance. This suggests that patient or other characteristics that contribute to cochlear implant-related quality of life remain largely unknown.

Bimodal Hearing or Bilateral Cochlear Implants? Ask the Patient

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to assess the effectiveness of various measures of speech understanding in distinguishing performance differences between adult bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients and to provide a preliminary evidence-based tool guiding clinical decisions regarding bilateral CI candidacy.

DESIGN

This study used a multiple-baseline, cross-sectional design investigating speech recognition performance for 85 experienced adult CI recipients (49 bimodal, 36 bilateral). Speech recognition was assessed in a standard clinical test environment with a single loudspeaker using the minimum speech test battery for adult CI recipients as well as with an R-SPACE 8-loudspeaker, sound-simulation system. All participants were tested in three listening conditions for each measure including each ear alone as well as in the bilateral/bimodal condition. In addition, we asked each bimodal listener to provide a yes/no answer to the question, "Do you think you need a second CI?"

RESULTS

This study yielded three primary findings: (1) there were no significant differences between bimodal and bilateral CI performance or binaural summation on clinical measures of speech recognition, (2) an adaptive speech recognition task in the R-SPACE system revealed significant differences in performance and binaural summation between bimodal and bilateral CI users, with bilateral CI users achieving significantly better performance and greater summation, and (3) the patient's answer to the question, "Do you think you need a second CI?" held high sensitivity (100% hit rate) for identifying likely bilateral CI candidates and moderately high specificity (77% correct rejection rate) for correctly identifying listeners best suited with a bimodal hearing configuration.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinics cannot rely on current clinical measures of speech understanding, with a single loudspeaker, to determine bilateral CI candidacy for adult bimodal listeners nor to accurately document bilateral benefit relative to a previous bimodal hearing configuration. Speech recognition in a complex listening environment, such as R-SPACE, is a sensitive and appropriate measure for determining bilateral CI candidacy and also likely for documenting bilateral benefit relative to a previous bimodal configuration. In the absence of an available R-SPACE system, asking the patient whether or not s/he thinks s/he needs a second CI is a highly sensitive measure, which may prove clinically useful.

Preliminary Results With Image-guided Cochlear Implant Insertion Techniques

HYPOTHESIS

Using patient-customized cochlear measurements obtained from preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans to guide insertion of cochlear implant (CI) electrode arrays will lead to more optimal intracochlear positioning.

BACKGROUND

Cochlear duct length is highly variable ranging from 25.26 to 35.46 mm, yet CI electrode arrays are treated as one size fits most. We sought to investigate the impact of patient-customized insertion plans on final location of electrode arrays.

METHODS

Twenty cadaveric temporal bone specimens were CT scanned and randomly divided into groups A and B. Group A specimens had an optimal customized insertion plan generated including entry site (e.g., round window versus extended round window), entry vector based on anatomical landmarks (e.g., hug posterior aspect of facial recess and angle 1 mm inferior to stapes), depth to begin advancing off stylet, and final insertion depth. Suboptimal plans were chosen for group B by selecting an approach that was normal yet predicted to result in poor final electrode location. One surgeon, blinded as to group, carried out the CI insertions following which the electrode array was fixed using superglue and the specimen CT scanned to allow assessment of final electrode location.

RESULTS

Average perimodiolar distances for groups A and B were 0.51 and 0.60 mm, respectively. For group A, full scala tympani insertion was achieved in all specimens while in group B, 4 of 10 specimens had scalar translocation.

CONCLUSION

Patient customized cochlear implant insertion techniques achieved better positioning of electrode arrays in this study and have potential for improving electrode positioning in patients.

General Health Quality of Life Instruments Underestimate the Impact of Bilateral Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

To determine the extent to which bilateral cochlear implantation increases patient-reported benefit as compared with unilateral implantation and no implantation.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases searches were performed using the keywords ("Cochlear Implant" or "Cochlear Implantation") and ("bilateral").

STUDY SELECTION

Studies assessing hearing/CI-specific (CI) and general-health-related (HR) quality of life (QOL) in adult patients after bilateral cochlear implantation were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Of the 31 articles meeting criteria, usable QOL data were available for 16 articles (n = 355 bilateral CI recipients).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Standardized mean difference (Δ) for each measure and weighted effects were determined. Meta-analysis was performed for all QOL measures and also independently for hearing/CI-specific QOL and HRQOL.

CONCLUSION

When measured using hearing/CI-specific QOL instruments, patients reported very large improvements in QOL comparing before cochlear implantation to bilateral CI (Δ=2.07 [1.76-2.38]) and medium improvements comparing unilateral CI to bilateral CI (Δ=0.51 [0.32- 0.71]). Utilization of parallel versus crossover study design did not impact QOL outcomes (χ = 0.512, p = 0.47). No detectable improvements were observed in either CI transition when using HRQOL instruments (no CI to bilateral CI: Δ=0.40 [-0.02 to 0.81]; unilateral CI to bilateral CI: Δ=0.22 [-0.02 to 0.46]).The universal nature of HRQOL instruments may render them insensitive to the medium to large QOL improvements reported by patients using hearing/CI-specific QOL instruments. Given that HRQOL instruments are used to determine the economic benefit of health interventions, these measurement differences suggest that the health economic value of bilateral cochlear implantation has been underestimated.

Binaural hearing advantages for children with bimodal fitting

OBJECTIVES

Bimodal fitting (BF) allows children with cochlear implant to benefit from binaural hearing advantages. Three major binaural hearing advantages, which enhance hearing function of people with normal hearing, are head shadow effect (HSE), binaural squelch effect (BSQ) and binaural summation effect (BSU). This study in pediatric patients attempting to measure the auditory benefits of bimodal stimulation in children with long-standing use of a cochlear implant (CI), and residual hearing on the contralateral side.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study investigated binaural advantages in 24 children of 8-12 years who had undergone cochlear implantation in a cochlear implant center in Tehran and continuously used BF. Improved score of speech perception in noise (SPiN) under BF condition, as compared to the application of cochlear implant alone, was a binaural advantage found in this study. Each binaural advantage was measured by obtaining the SPiN score under different listening and noise conditions, using relevant formulas. The measured value of each advantage reflects the improved score of SPiN, caused by that certain advantage.

RESULTS

In this study, improved mean SPiN score caused by the HSE, BSQ and BSU was, respectively, 3.13, 1.42 and 2.04 dB, indicating greater binaural advantages and hence improved SPiN, under BF condition in comparison with cochlear implant alone.

CONCLUSION

Children with unilateral cochlear implant and measurable residual hearing in non-implanted ear can benefit from binaural advantages and better SPiN when hearing aid is used in the unaided ear.

Further Evidence of the Relationship Between Cochlear Implant Electrode Positioning and Hearing Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Postoperative imaging studies by numerous groups have revealed that final cochlear implant (CI) electrode position impacts audiological outcomes with scalar location consistently shown to be a significant factor. Modiolar proximity has been less extensively studied, and findings regarding the effect of insertion depth have been inconsistent.

METHODS

Using previously developed automated algorithms, we determined CI electrode position in an Institutional Review Board-approved database of 220 CI ears. Generalized linear models (GLM) were used to analyze the relationship between audiological outcomes and factors including age, duration of CI use, device type, and electrode position.

RESULTS

For precurved arrays, GLM revealed that scalar position, modiolar proximity, base insertion depth, and sex were significant factors for Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) words (R = 0.43, p < 0.001, n = 92 arrays), while scalar position, modiolar proximity, age, and postlingual onset of deafness were significant for Bamford-Kawal-Bench Sentences in Noise (BKB-SIN) (R = 0.51, p < 0.001, n = 85) scores. Other factors were not significant in the final model after controlling for these variables. For straight arrays, we found the insertion depth, postlingual deafness, and length of CI use to be highly significant (R = 0.47, p < 0.001) factors for CNC words (91 arrays), while for BKB-SIN scores the most significant (R = 0.47, p < 0.001) factors were insertion depth, younger age, and postlingual deafness (89 arrays).

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm the significance of electrode positioning in audiological outcomes. The most significant positional predictors of outcome for precurved arrays were full scala tympani (ST) insertion and the modiolar distance, while for the lateral wall arrays the depth of insertion was the most significant factor.

Comparison Between Simulated and Actual Unilateral Hearing in Sequentially Implanted Cochlear Implant Users, a Cohort Study

Introduction: Previous studies have proven the effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implantation compared to unilateral cochlear implantation. In many of these studies the unilateral hearing situation was simulated by switching off one of the cochlear implants in bilateral cochlear implant users. In the current study we assess the accuracy of this test method. Does simulated unilateral hearing (switching off one cochlear implant) result in the same outcomes as real life unilateral hearing with one cochlear implant and a non-implanted contralateral ear?

Study design: We assessed the outcomes of one arm of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Methods: In the original trial, 38 postlingually deafened adults were randomly allocated to either simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation or sequential bilateral cochlear implantation. In the current study we used the data of the sequentially implanted group (n = 19). The primary outcome was speech perception-in-noise from straight ahead. Secondary outcomes were speech perception-in-silence, speech intelligibility-in-noise from spatially separated sources and localization capabilities. A within-subjects design was used to compare the results of hearing with one cochlear implant and a non-implanted contralateral ear (1- and 2-year follow-up) with the results of switching off one cochlear implant after sequential bilateral implantation (3-year follow-up).

Results: We found no significant differences on any of the objective outcomes after 1-, 2-, or 3-year follow-up.

Conclusion: This study shows that simulating unilateral hearing by switching off one cochlear implant seems a reliable method to compare unilateral and bilateral hearing in bilaterally implanted patients.

Clinical Trial Registration: Dutch Trial Register NTR1722.

The Effect of Nonlinear Amplitude Growth on the Speech Perception Benefits Provided by a Single-Sided Vocoder

Purpose For listeners with single-sided deafness, a cochlear implant (CI) can improve speech understanding by giving the listener access to the ear with the better target-to-masker ratio (TMR; head shadow) or by providing interaural difference cues to facilitate the perceptual separation of concurrent talkers (squelch). CI simulations presented to listeners with normal hearing examined how these benefits could be affected by interaural differences in loudness growth in a speech-on-speech masking task. Method Experiment 1 examined a target-masker spatial configuration where the vocoded ear had a poorer TMR than the nonvocoded ear. Experiment 2 examined the reverse configuration. Generic head-related transfer functions simulated free-field listening. Compression or expansion was applied independently to each vocoder channel (power-law exponents: 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, or 2). Results Compression reduced the benefit provided by the vocoder ear in both experiments. There was some evidence that expansion increased squelch in Experiment 1 but reduced the benefit in Experiment 2 where the vocoder ear provided a combination of head-shadow and squelch benefits. Conclusions The effects of compression and expansion are interpreted in terms of envelope distortion and changes in the vocoded-ear TMR (for head shadow) or changes in perceived target-masker spatial separation (for squelch). The compression parameter is a candidate for clinical optimization to improve single-sided deafness CI outcomes.

The Effect of Simulated Interaural Frequency Mismatch on Speech Understanding and Spatial Release From Masking

OBJECTIVE

The binaural-hearing system interaurally compares inputs, which underlies the ability to localize sound sources and to better understand speech in complex acoustic environments. Cochlear implants (CIs) are provided in both ears to increase binaural-hearing benefits; however, bilateral CI users continue to struggle with understanding speech in the presence of interfering sounds and do not achieve the same level of spatial release from masking (SRM) as normal-hearing listeners. One reason for diminished SRM in CI users could be that the electrode arrays are inserted at different depths in each ear, which would cause an interaural frequency mismatch. Because interaural frequency mismatch diminishes the salience of interaural differences for relatively simple stimuli, it may also diminish binaural benefits for spectral-temporally complex stimuli like speech. This study evaluated the effect of simulated frequency-to-place mismatch on speech understanding and SRM.

DESIGN

Eleven normal-hearing listeners were tested on a speech understanding task. There was a female target talker who spoke five-word sentences from a closed set of words. There were two interfering male talkers who spoke unrelated sentences. Nonindividualized head-related transfer functions were used to simulate a virtual auditory space. The target was presented from the front (0°), and the interfering speech was either presented from the front (colocated) or from 90° to the right (spatially separated). Stimuli were then processed by an eight-channel vocoder with tonal carriers to simulate aspects of listening through a CI. Frequency-to-place mismatch ("shift") was introduced by increasing the center frequency of the synthesis filters compared with the corresponding analysis filters. Speech understanding was measured for different shifts (0, 3, 4.5, and 6 mm) and target-to-masker ratios (TMRs: +10 to -10 dB). SRM was calculated as the difference in the percentage of correct words for the colocated and separated conditions. Two types of shifts were tested: (1) bilateral shifts that had the same frequency-to-place mismatch in both ears, but no interaural frequency mismatch, and (2) unilateral shifts that produced an interaural frequency mismatch.

RESULTS

For the bilateral shift conditions, speech understanding decreased with increasing shift and with decreasing TMR, for both colocated and separate conditions. There was, however, no interaction between shift and spatial configuration; in other words, SRM was not affected by shift. For the unilateral shift conditions, speech understanding decreased with increasing interaural mismatch and with decreasing TMR for both the colocated and spatially separated conditions. Critically, there was a significant interaction between the amount of shift and spatial configuration; in other words, SRM decreased for increasing interaural mismatch.

CONCLUSIONS

A frequency-to-place mismatch in one or both ears resulted in decreased speech understanding. SRM, however, was only affected in conditions with unilateral shifts and interaural frequency mismatch. Therefore, matching frequency information between the ears provides listeners with larger binaural-hearing benefits, for example, improved speech understanding in the presence of interfering talkers. A clinical procedure to reduce interaural frequency mismatch when programming bilateral CIs may improve benefits in speech segregation that are due to binaural-hearing abilities.

Comparing the Effect of Different Hearing Aid Fitting Methods in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users

Purpose The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of 3 hearing aid fitting procedures on provided gain of the hearing aid in bimodal cochlear implant users and their effect on bimodal benefit. Method This prospective study measured hearing aid gain and auditory performance in a cross-over design in which 3 hearing aid fitting methods were compared. Hearing aid fitting methods differed in initial gain prescription rule (NAL-NL2 and Audiogram+) and loudness balancing method (broadband vs. narrowband loudness balancing). Auditory functioning was evaluated by a speech-in-quiet test, a speech-in-noise test, and a sound localization test. Fourteen postlingually deafened adult bimodal cochlear implant users participated in the study. Results No differences in provided gain and in bimodal performance were found for the different hearing aid fittings. For all hearing aid fittings, a bimodal benefit was found for speech in noise and sound localization. Conclusion Our results confirm that cochlear implant users with residual hearing in the contralateral ear substantially benefit from bimodal stimulation. However, on average, no differences were found between different types of fitting methods, varying in prescription rule and loudness balancing method.

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.

Contralateral Routing of Signal Yields Significant Speech in Noise Benefit for Unilateral Cochlear Implant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Bilateral cochlear implantation is the standard of care for individuals with moderate sloping-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss who do not receive benefit from appropriately fit hearing aids. Because of financial, insurance, or medical reasons, some unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients are unable to obtain a second CI. Here, we evaluated the first clinically available solution for individuals who have been unilaterally implanted and who do not or cannot use technology (e.g., hearing aid or CI) on the non-implanted ear.

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate how the addition of a contralateral routing of signal (CROS) device could provide objective and/or subjective benefit to adult CI recipients with moderate-to-profound hearing loss in the non-implanted ear.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Single-center prospective study using a within-subjects repeated-measures design.

STUDY SAMPLE

Participants included ten experienced unilateral CI recipients with severe-to-profound (n = 9) or moderate-to-profound (n = 1) sensorineural hearing loss in the non-implanted ear. At the time of study enrollment, participants did not use any technology on the non-implanted ear. No other exclusion criteria were used.

INTERVENTION

Individuals were tested with and without a CROS device worn on the non-implanted ear.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We obtained measures of speech understanding in quiet (50 and 65 dBA) and in noise (+5-dB signal-to-noise ratio with a 65-dBA speech signal) both with and without the CROS device in an acute listening condition. Subjective benefit was assessed via the Speech, Spatial and Qualities 12-item questionnaire before CROS fitting and after two weeks of continuous use. A mixed-model, repeated-measures analysis of variance was completed with three talker locations and three presentation levels included as within-subjects factors and the presence or absence of a CROS device as a between-subjects factor.

RESULTS

There was an 11% improvement in speech understanding in noise with the addition of the CROS device when speech was located at 0° azimuth. Subjective benefit in the speech domain of the SSQ was also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of CROS provided both subjective and objective speech recognition benefit for unilateral CI recipients who do not have access to bilateral cochlear implantation.

Speech Detection in Noise for Young Bilaterally Implanted Children: Is There Evidence of Binaural Benefit Over the Shadowed Ear Alone?

OBJECTIVES

To measure binaural benefit over the shadowed ear alone for young bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users. It was hypothesized that children who received bilateral CIs at a young age (<4 years), and had significant bilateral experience, would demonstrate lower detection thresholds for speech sounds in background noise in the bilateral CI over the unilateral CI condition when the added CI was ipsilateral to the noise source.

DESIGN

Children receiving bilateral CIs at the Eye and Ear Hospital Clinic in Melbourne were invited to participate in a wider research project evaluating outcomes; those participating in the wider project who were bilaterally implanted by 4 years and were approximately 2 years postoperative were included in the present study. For 20 participants, detection signal to noise ratios (SNRs) were measured for speech presented from in front and noise from 90° in at least 3 of 4 device/noise conditions, namely left CI/noise right and right CI/noise left, plus bilateral CIs/noise right and bilateral CIs/noise left.

RESULTS

As some participants could only complete testing in 3 conditions within the 1 test block, the unilateral versus bilateral comparison was performed for 1 CI (i.e., 1 noise direction) for 15 participants and for both CIs (i.e., noise left and noise right) for 5 participants. Group analysis indicated no significant difference in detection SNR between the unilateral and bilateral CI conditions when adding the left CI or right CI (for the overall group) or when adding the first or second CI (for the 15 participants with sequential bilateral CIs). Separate analyses indicated no significant difference in detection SNR between the unilateral and bilateral CI conditions for the majority of individuals; this occurred irrespective of whether the analysis indicated that the CI added in the bilateral condition was poorer-performing, better-performing, or not significantly different compared with the other CI. Four individuals demonstrated a significant improvement in the bilateral condition when the CI added in the bilateral condition was a better-performing (n = 1), poorer-performing (n = 2), or not significantly different CI (n = 1). There was no relationship between the detection SNR difference between each CI and the detection SNR difference between the unilateral and bilateral conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The hypothesis of a lower detection SNR in the bilateral condition was not supported by the group results or by the results for the majority of individuals. For the 4 participants who did demonstrate benefit over the shadowed ear alone, that benefit cannot be separated from the potential benefit gained as a result of the CI added in the bilateral condition being the better-performing CI for 1 of the 4. Variation in outcomes could not be related to demographic factors for this group, which was relatively homogeneous for age at bilateral CI and experience; an older, more experienced group may demonstrate greater binaural benefit in these conditions. These results can be used during counseling for families regarding postoperative expectations for young children, especially in the first 2 years.

Dietrich M, Dorman MF. Speech Understanding in Noise for Adults With Cochlear Implants: Effects of Hearing Configuration, Source Location Certainty, and Head Movement

Purpose

The primary purpose of this study was to assess speech understanding in quiet and in diffuse noise for adult cochlear implant (CI) recipients utilizing bimodal hearing or bilateral CIs. Our primary hypothesis was that bilateral CI recipients would demonstrate less effect of source azimuth in the bilateral CI condition due to symmetric interaural head shadow.

Method

Sentence recognition was assessed for adult bilateral (n = 25) CI users and bimodal listeners (n = 12) in three conditions: (1) source location certainty regarding fixed target azimuth, (2) source location uncertainty regarding roving target azimuth, and (3) Condition 2 repeated, allowing listeners to turn their heads, as needed.

Results

(a) Bilateral CI users exhibited relatively similar performance regardless of source azimuth in the bilateral CI condition; (b) bimodal listeners exhibited higher performance for speech directed to the better hearing ear even in the bimodal condition; (c) the unilateral, better ear condition yielded higher performance for speech presented to the better ear versus speech to the front or to the poorer ear; (d) source location certainty did not affect speech understanding performance; and (e) head turns did not improve performance. The results confirmed our hypothesis that bilateral CI users exhibited less effect of source azimuth than bimodal listeners. That is, they exhibited similar performance for speech recognition irrespective of source azimuth, whereas bimodal listeners exhibited significantly poorer performance with speech originating from the poorer hearing ear (typically the nonimplanted ear).

Conclusions

Bilateral CI users overcame ear and source location effects observed for the bimodal listeners. Bilateral CI users have access to head shadow on both sides, whereas bimodal listeners generally have interaural asymmetry in both speech understanding and audible bandwidth limiting the head shadow benefit obtained from the poorer ear (generally the nonimplanted ear). In summary, we found that, in conditions with source location uncertainty and increased ecological validity, bilateral CI performance was superior to bimodal listening.

Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adult Listeners: Speech-On-Speech Masking and Multitalker Localization

Binaural hearing helps normal-hearing listeners localize sound sources and understand speech in noise. However, it is not fully understood how far this is the case for bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users. To determine the potential benefits of bilateral over unilateral CIs, speech comprehension thresholds (SCTs) were measured in seven Japanese bilateral CI recipients using Helen test sentences (translated into Japanese) in a two-talker speech interferer presented from the front (co-located with the target speech), ipsilateral to the first-implanted ear (at +90° or -90°), and spatially symmetric at ±90°. Spatial release from masking was calculated as the difference between co-located and spatially separated SCTs. Localization was assessed in the horizontal plane by presenting either male or female speech or both simultaneously. All measurements were performed bilaterally and unilaterally (with the first implanted ear) inside a loudspeaker array. Both SCTs and spatial release from masking were improved with bilateral CIs, demonstrating mean bilateral benefits of 7.5 dB in spatially asymmetric and 3 dB in spatially symmetric speech mixture. Localization performance varied strongly between subjects but was clearly improved with bilateral over unilateral CIs with the mean localization error reduced by 27°. Surprisingly, adding a second talker had only a negligible effect on localization.

Isolated Second Implant Adaptation Period in Sequential Cochlear Implantation in Adults

OBJECTIVE

To determine if depriving the use of the first cochlear implant (CI1) impacts adaptation to a sequential implant (CI2).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

Academic center.

PATIENTS

Sixteen unilateral cochlear implant recipients undergoing contralateral implantation (sequential bilateral) were matched according to age, etiology, duration of deafness, device age, and delay between implants.

INTERVENTION

During a 4-week adaptation period after CI2 activation, patients underwent deprivation of CI1 or were permitted continued use of it.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Speech perception scores and subjective quality of life outcomes before CI2 and at 1, 3, 6, and 12-months following activation.

RESULTS

Maximal CI2 speech perception scores in quiet were achieved by 1-month postactivation for the "deprivation" group (71.3% for hearing in noise test [HINT], p = 0.767 for change beyond 1-mo) compared with 6-months for the "continued use" group (67.9% for HINT, p = 0.064 for change beyond 6-mo). The "deprivation" group experienced a temporary drop in CI1 scores (67.9% for HINT in quiet at 1-mo versus 78.4% pre-CI2, p = 0.009) recovering to 77.3% by 3-months; unchanged from baseline levels (p = 1.0). A binaural advantage over the better hearing ear was present for HINT sentences with noise (72.4% versus 58.8% for "deprivation", p = 0.001; 71.5% versus 52.7% for "continued use," p = 0.01). Missing data precluded a meaningful analysis of subjective quality of life outcome scales.

CONCLUSION

Bilateral cochlear implantation improves speech perception compared with one implant. A period of deprivation from CI1 shortens time to maximum speech perception by CI2 without long-term consequences on the performance of CI1.

Better-ear glimpsing with symmetrically-placed interferers in bilateral cochlear implant users

For a frontal target in spatially symmetrically placed interferers, normal hearing (NH) listeners can use "better-ear glimpsing" to select time-frequency segments with favorable signal-to-noise ratio in either ear. With an ideal monaural better-ear mask (IMBM) processing, some studies showed that NH listeners can reach similar performance as in the natural binaural listening condition, although interaural phase differences at low frequencies can further improve performance. In principle, bilateral cochlear implant (BiCI) listeners could use the same better-ear glimpsing, albeit without exploiting interaural phase differences. Speech reception thresholds of NH and BiCI listeners were measured in three interferers (speech-shaped stationary noise, nonsense speech, or single talker) either co-located with the target, symmetrically placed at ±60°, or independently presented to each ear, with and without IMBM processing. Furthermore, a bilateral noise vocoder based on the BiCI electrodogram was used in the same NH listeners. Headphone presentation and direct stimulation with head-related transfer functions for spatialization were used in NH and BiCI listeners, respectively. Compared to NH listeners, both NH listeners with vocoder and BiCI listeners showed strongly reduced binaural benefit from spatial separation. However, both groups greatly benefited from IMBM processing as part of the stimulation strategy.

Spatial Release From Masking in Adults With Bilateral Cochlear Implants: Effects of Distracter Azimuth and Microphone Location

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this study was to derive spatial release from masking (SRM) performance-azimuth functions for bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users to provide a thorough description of SRM as a function of target/distracter spatial configuration. The secondary purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the microphone location for SRM in a within-subject study design.

METHOD

Speech recognition was measured in 12 adults with bilateral CIs for 11 spatial separations ranging from -90° to +90° in 20° steps using an adaptive block design. Five of the 12 participants were tested with both the behind-the-ear microphones and a T-mic configuration to further investigate the effect of mic location on SRM.

RESULTS

SRM can be significantly affected by the hemifield origin of the distracter stimulus-particularly for listeners with interaural asymmetry in speech understanding. The greatest SRM was observed with a distracter positioned 50° away from the target. There was no effect of mic location on SRM for the current experimental design.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that the traditional assessment of SRM with a distracter positioned at 90° azimuth may underestimate maximum performance for individuals with bilateral CIs.

Binaural Speech Understanding With Bilateral Cochlear Implants in Reverberation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether bilateral cochlear implant (CI) listeners who are fitted with clinical processors are able to benefit from binaural advantages under reverberant conditions. Another aim of this contribution was to determine whether the magnitude of each binaural advantage observed inside a highly reverberant environment differs significantly from the magnitude measured in a near-anechoic environment.

METHOD

Ten adults with postlingual deafness who are bilateral CI users fitted with either Nucleus 5 or Nucleus 6 clinical sound processors (Cochlear Corporation) participated in this study. Speech reception thresholds were measured in sound field and 2 different reverberation conditions (0.06 and 0.6 s) as a function of the listening condition (left, right, both) and the noise spatial location (left, front, right).

RESULTS

The presence of the binaural effects of head-shadow, squelch, summation, and spatial release from masking in the 2 different reverberation conditions tested was determined using nonparametric statistical analysis. In the bilateral population tested, when the ambient reverberation time was equal to 0.6 s, results indicated strong positive effects of head-shadow and a weaker spatial release from masking advantage, whereas binaural squelch and summation contributed no statistically significant benefit to bilateral performance under this acoustic condition. These findings are consistent with those of previous studies, which have demonstrated that head-shadow yields the most pronounced advantage in noise. The finding that spatial release from masking produced little to almost no benefit in bilateral listeners is consistent with the hypothesis that additive reverberation degrades spatial cues and negatively affects binaural performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The magnitude of 4 different binaural advantages was measured on the same group of bilateral CI subjects fitted with clinical processors in 2 different reverberation conditions. The results of this work demonstrate the impeding properties of reverberation on binaural speech understanding. In addition, results indicate that CI recipients who struggle in everyday listening environments are also more likely to benefit less in highly reverberant environments from their bilateral processors.

Nonlinguistic Outcome Measures in Adult Cochlear Implant Users Over the First Year of Implantation

OBJECTIVES

Postlingually deaf cochlear implant users' speech perception improves over several months after implantation due to a learning process which involves integration of the new acoustic information presented by the device. Basic tests of hearing acuity might evaluate sensitivity to the new acoustic information and be less sensitive to learning effects. It was hypothesized that, unlike speech perception, basic spectral and temporal discrimination abilities will not change over the first year of implant use. If there were limited change over time and the test scores were correlated with clinical outcome, the tests might be useful for acute diagnostic assessments of hearing ability and also useful for testing speakers of any language, many of which do not have validated speech tests.

DESIGN

Ten newly implanted cochlear implant users were tested for speech understanding in quiet and in noise at 1 and 12 months postactivation. Spectral-ripple discrimination, temporal-modulation detection, and Schroeder-phase discrimination abilities were evaluated at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postactivation.

RESULTS

Speech understanding in quiet improved between 1 and 12 months postactivation (mean 8% improvement). Speech in noise performance showed no statistically significant improvement. Mean spectral-ripple discrimination thresholds and temporal-modulation detection thresholds for modulation frequencies of 100 Hz and above also showed no significant improvement. Spectral-ripple discrimination thresholds were significantly correlated with speech understanding. Low FM detection and Schroeder-phase discrimination abilities improved over the period. Individual learning trends varied, but the majority of listeners followed the same stable pattern as group data.

CONCLUSIONS

Spectral-ripple discrimination ability and temporal-modulation detection at 100-Hz modulation and above might serve as a useful diagnostic tool for early acute assessment of cochlear implant outcome for listeners speaking any native language.

Cochlear implant phantom for evaluating computed tomography acquisition parameters

Cochlear implants (CIs) are surgically implantable neuroprosthetic devices used to treat profound hearing loss. Recent literature indicates that there is a correlation between the final intracochlear positioning of the CI electrode arrays and the ultimate hearing outcome of the patient, indicating that further studies to better understand the relationship between electrode position and outcomes could have significant implications for future surgical techniques, array design, and processor programming methods. Postimplantation high-resolution computed tomography (CT) imaging is the best modality for localizing electrodes and provides the resolution necessary to visually identify electrode position, although with an unknown degree of accuracy depending on image acquisition parameters, like the hounsfield unit (HU) range of reconstruction, orientation, radiation dose, and image resolution. We report on the development of a phantom and on its use to study how four acquisition parameters, including image resolution and HU range of reconstruction, affect how accurately the true position of the electrodes can be found in a dataset of CT scans acquired from multiple helical and cone beam scanners. We also show how the phantom can be used to evaluate the effect of acquisition parameters on automatic electrode localization techniques.

Speech Understanding in Complex Listening Environments by Listeners Fit With Cochlear Implants

PURPOSE

The aim of this article is to summarize recent published and unpublished research from our 2 laboratories on improving speech understanding in complex listening environments by listeners fit with cochlear implants (CIs).

METHOD

CI listeners were tested in 2 listening environments. One was a simulation of a restaurant with multiple, diffuse noise sources, and the other was a cocktail party with 2 spatially separated point sources of competing speech. At issue was the value of the following sources of information, or interventions, on speech understanding: (a) visual information, (b) adaptive beamformer microphones and remote microphones, (c) bimodal fittings, that is, a CI and contralateral low-frequency acoustic hearing, (d) hearing preservation fittings, that is, a CI with preserved low-frequency acoustic in the same ear plus low-frequency acoustic hearing in the contralateral ear, and (e) bilateral CIs.

RESULTS

A remote microphone provided the largest improvement in speech understanding. Visual information and adaptive beamformers ranked next, while bimodal fittings, bilateral fittings, and hearing preservation provided significant but less benefit than the other interventions or sources of information. Only bilateral CIs allowed listeners high levels of speech understanding when signals were roved over the frontal plane.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence supports the use of bilateral CIs and hearing preservation surgery for best speech understanding in complex environments. These fittings, when combined with visual information and microphone technology, should lead to high levels of speech understanding by CI patients in complex listening environments.

PRESENTATION VIDEO

http://cred.pubs.asha.org/article.aspx?articleid=2601622.

Development of a Squelch Effect in Adult Patients After Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether a squelch effect occurs in the first 3 years after simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation and to investigate whether this effect increases during follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial that compares simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation to sequential and unilateral cochlear implantation.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Nineteen postlingually deafened adults.

INTERVENTION

Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The squelch effect, measured yearly with a speech-intelligibility-in-noise test with spatially separated sources. Bilateral results were compared to unilateral results in which the cochlear implant at the noise side was turned off. The squelch effect was investigated for the patients' best performing ear and for the left and right ears separately.

RESULTS

In 13 individual patients, a squelch effect was present after 1 year. This number increased during follow-up years. On group level, a squelch effect was present in patients' best performing ear after 2 and 3 years (1.9 dB). A squelch effect was present in both ears after 3 years (AS: 1.7 dB, AD: 1.3 dB).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation developed a measurable benefit from the squelch effect after 2 years in their best performing ear and after 3 years in both ears. These observations suggest that the brain learns to use interaural differences to segregate sound from noise after simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation. The squelch effect increased over time which suggests a growth in cortical integration and differentiation of inputs from bilateral CIs due to brain plasticity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register NTR1722.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b.

Spatial attention in bilateral cochlear-implant users

Cochlear-implant (CI) users have difficulty understanding speech in the presence of interfering sounds. This study was designed to determine if binaural unmasking of speech is limited by peripheral or central encoding. Speech was presented to bilateral CI listeners using their clinical processors; unprocessed or vocoded speech was presented to normal-hearing (NH) listeners. Performance was worst for all listener groups in conditions where both the target and interferer were presented monaurally or diotically (i.e., no spatial differences). Listeners demonstrated improved performance compared to the monaural and diotic conditions when the target and interferer were presented to opposite ears. However, only some CI listeners demonstrated improved performance if the target was in one ear and the interferer was presented diotically, and there was no change for the group on average. This is unlike the 12-dB benefit observed in the NH group when presented the CI simulation. The results suggest that CI users can direct attention to a target talker if the target and interferer are presented to opposite ears; however, larger binaural benefits are limited for more realistic listening configurations, likely due to the imprecise peripheral encoding of the two sounds.