Prospective case-controlled sound localisation study after cochlear implantation in adults with single-sided deafness and ipsilateral tinnitus

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

PURPOSE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Masked Speech Perception with Bone Conduction Device, Contralateral Routing of Signals Hearing Aid, and Cochlear Implant Use in Adults with Single-Sided Deafness: A Prospective Hearing Device Comparison using a Unified Testing Framework

INTRODUCTION

For the treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD), common treatment choices include a contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aid, a bone conduction device (BCD), and a cochlear implant (CI). The primary aim of this study was to compare speech understanding in noise and binaural benefits in adults with postlingual SSD between preoperative unaided baseline, preoperative CROS and BCD trial devices, and CI, following recommendations from a consensus protocol. In addition, we investigated the effect of masker type on speech understanding.

METHODS

This was a prospective study with twelve participants. Binaural effects of head shadow, squelch, summation, and spatial release from masking were assessed by measuring speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in five different spatial target-masker configurations using two different maskers: two-talker babble (TTB), and speech-shaped noise (SSN). Preoperatively, participants were assessed unaided and with CROS and BCD trial devices. After cochlear implantation, participants were assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months post-activation.

RESULTS

For TTB, significant improvements in SRT with a CI relative to preoperatively unaided were found in all spatial configurations. With CI at 6 months, median benefits were 7.8 dB in SSSDNAH and 5.1 dB in S0NAH (head shadow), 3.4 dB in S0N0 (summation), and 4.6 dB in S0NSSD and 5.1 dB in SAHNSSD (squelch). CROS yielded a significant head shadow benefit of 2.4 dB in SSSDNAH and a significant deterioration in squelch of 2.5 dB in S0NSSD and SAHNSSD, but no summation effect. With BCD, there was a significant summation benefit of 1.5 dB, but no head shadow nor squelch effect. For SSN, significant improvements in SRT with CI compared to preoperatively unaided were found in three spatial configurations. Median benefits with CI at 6 months were: 8.5 dB in SSSDNAH and 4.6 dB in S0NAH (head shadow), 1.4 dB in S0N0 (summation), but no squelch. CROS showed a significant head shadow benefit of 1.7 dB in SSSDNAH, but no summation effect, and a significant deterioration in squelch of 2.9 dB in S0NSSD and 3.2 dB in SAHNSSD. With BCD, no binaural effect was obtained. Longitudinally, we found significant head shadow benefits with a CI in SSSDNAH in both maskers at all postoperative intervals and in S0NAH at 3 and 6 months post-activation.

CONCLUSION

With a CI, a clear benefit for masked speech perception was observed for all binaural effects. Benefits with CROS and BCD were more limited. CROS usage was detrimental to the squelch effect.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DATA SOURCE

An electronic search of Medline and Embase articles.

REVIEW METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Sound localisation of low- and high-frequency sounds in cochlear implant users with single-sided deafness

OBJECTIVE

Localisation of low- and high-frequency sounds in single-sided deaf cochlear implant users was investigated using noise stimuli designed to mitigate monaural localisation cues.

DESIGN

Within subject design. Sound source localisation was tested in the horizontal plane using an array of seven loudspeakers along the azimuthal angle span from -90° to +90°. Stimuli were broadband noise and high- and low-frequency noise.

STUDY SAMPLE

Twelve adult subjects with single-sided deafness participated in the study. All had normal hearing in the healthy ear and were supplied with a cochlear implant (CI) in their deaf ear.

RESULTS

With broadband noise, the mean angular localisation error was 39° in aided condition as compared to a median angular error of 83.6° when the speech processor was not worn. For high-frequency noise, the median angular error was 30° and for low-frequency noise, it was 46° in the CI-aided condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-sided deaf CI users show the best sound localisation for high-frequency sounds. This supports the view that interaural level differences are dominant for sound localisation in these listeners. Nonetheless, a limited ability to localise low-frequency sounds was observed, which may be based on the supportive perception of interaural time differences.

Sound localization in patients with bilateral vestibulopathy

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to evaluate if bilaterally (partially) absent vestibular function during static sound localization testing, would have a negative impact on sound localization skills. Therefore, this study compared horizontal static sound localization skills of normal-hearing patients with bilateral vestibulopathy (BV) and healthy controls.

METHODS

Thirteen normal-hearing patients with BV and thirteen age-matched healthy controls were included. Sound localization skills were tested using seven loudspeakers in a frontal semicircle, ranging from - 90° to + 90°. Sound location accuracy was analyzed using the root-mean-square error (RMSE) and the mean absolute error (MAE). To evaluate the severity of the BV symptoms, the following questionnaires were used: Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI), Oscillopsia severity questionnaire (OSQ), 12-item Spatial, Speech, and Qualities Questionnaire (SSQ12), and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3).

RESULTS

The RMSE and MAE were significantly larger (worse) in the BV group than in the healthy control group, with respective median RMSE of 4.6° and 0°, and a median MAE of 0.7° and 0°. The subjective reporting of speech perception, spatial hearing, and quality of life only demonstrated a moderate correlation between DHI (positive correlation) and HUI total score (negative correlation), and localization scores.

CONCLUSION

Static sound localization skills of patients with BV were only mildly worse compared to healthy controls. However, this difference was very small and therefore most likely due to impaired cognitive function. The vestibular system does not seem to have a modulating role in sound localization during static conditions, and its impact is negligible in contrast to the impact of hearing impairment. Furthermore, the subjective reporting of speech perception, spatial hearing, and quality of life was not strongly correlated with localization scores.

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

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

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

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, repeated measures study.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 132:2453-2458, 2022.

Towards a Consensus on an ICF-Based Classification System for Horizontal Sound-Source Localization

The study aimed to develop a consensus classification system for the reporting of sound localization testing results, especially in the field of cochlear implantation. Against the background of an overview of the wide variations present in localization testing procedures and reporting metrics, a novel classification system was proposed to report localization errors according to the widely accepted International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. The obtained HEARRING_LOC_ICF scale includes the ICF graded scale: 0 (no impairment), 1 (mild impairment), 2 (moderate impairment), 3 (severe impairment), and 4 (complete impairment). Improvement of comparability of localization results across institutes, localization testing setups, and listeners was demonstrated by applying the classification system retrospectively to data obtained from cohorts of normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners at our institutes. The application of our classification system will help to facilitate multi-center studies, as well as allowing better meta-analyses of data, resulting in improved evidence-based practice in the field.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

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

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

Sound Source Localization by Cochlear Implant Recipients with Normal Hearing in the Contralateral Ear: Effects of Spectral Content and Duration of Listening Experience

INTRODUCTION

Cochlear implant (CI) recipients with normal hearing (NH) in the contralateral ear experience a significant improvement in sound source localization when listening with the CI in combination with their NH-ear (CI + NH) as compared to with the NH-ear alone. The improvement in localization is primarily due to sensitivity to interaural level differences (ILDs). Sensitivity to interaural timing differences (ITDs) may be limited by auditory aging, frequency-to-place mismatches, the signal coding strategy, and duration of CI use. The present report assessed the sensitivity of ILD and ITD cues in CI + NH listeners who were recipients of long electrode arrays that provide minimal frequency-to-place mismatches and were mapped with a coding strategy that presents fine structure cues on apical channels.

METHODS

Sensitivity to ILDs and ITDs for localization was assessed using broadband noise (BBN), as well as high-pass (HP) and low-pass (LP) filtered noise for adult CI + NH listeners. Stimuli were 200-ms noise bursts presented from 11 speakers spaced evenly over an 180° arc. Performance was quantified in root-mean-squared error and response patterns were analyzed to evaluate the consistency, accuracy, and side bias of the responses. Fifteen listeners completed the task at the 2-year post-activation visit; seven listeners repeated the task at a later annual visit.

RESULTS

Performance at the 2-year visit was best with the BBN and HP stimuli and poorer with the LP stimulus. Responses to the BBN and HP stimuli were significantly correlated, consistent with the idea that CI + NH listeners primarily use ILD cues for localization. For the LP stimulus, some listeners responded consistently and accurately and with limited side bias, which may indicate sensitivity to ITD cues. Two of the 7 listeners who repeated the task at a later annual visit experienced a significant improvement in performance with the LP stimulus, which may indicate that sensitivity to ITD cues may improve with long-term CI use.

CONCLUSIONS

CI recipients with a NH-ear primarily use ILD cues for sound source localization, though some may use ITD cues as well. Sensitivity to ITD cues may improve with long-term CI listening experience.

Sensitivity and specificity of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ5) for screening hearing in adults

PURPOSE

To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of 5 questions of the SSQ in Brazilian Portuguese for its application as a hearing screening instrument in adults.

METHODS

A total of 135 adults with a mean age of 49.6 years and education of 9 years took part in the study. All subjects underwent hearing tests and were divided into 2 groups according to hearing acuity: G1 - 66 individuals with normal hearing on audiometric test: and G2 - 69 participants with impaired hearing on audiometric evaluation in one or both ears. The 5 items of the SSQ5, derived from the Brazilian Portuguese version of the SSQ49 were applied. The level of significance was set at a p-value ≤ 0.05, with a 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

G1 subjects were younger and higher educated (p<0.01). A weak positive correlation was found between education and SSQ5 score only in G1. In G2, there was no correlation of age or education with SSQ5 performance. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the relationship between SSQ5 and audiometric average was 0.854 and p-value was <0.001 with bounds of 0.79 and 0.91. SSQ5 scores were lower in G2 (p<0.001). The cut-off point with optimal balance between sensitivity and specificity was 7.3, yielding 80% accuracy, 81.8% sensitivity and 78.3% specificity.

CONCLUSION

The Brazilian Portuguese version of the SSQ5 proved suitable for screening hearing loss in adults, offering good accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for detecting hearing loss.

Cochlear Implants in Single-Sided Deafness. Comparison Between Children and Adult Populations With Post-lingually Acquired Severe to Profound Hearing Loss

Objective: To determine audiological and clinical results of cochlear implantation (CI) comparing two populations with single-sided deafness (SSD): post-lingually deaf children between 6 and 12 years of age, and post-lingually deaf adults, in order to evaluate the effect of CI in different age groups. Design: Retrospective case review. Setting: Tertiary clinic. Patients and Method: Twenty-three children and twenty-one adult patients that were candidates for CI with single-side deafness were included. In all cases we evaluate: Speech perception thresholds; disyllabic words test (65 dB SPL) were performed in the modalities S0-SCI-SNH and Auditory Lateralization Test. The Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) questionnaire was also used. All results were obtained after 12 months of CI activation. Results: In children, the most common etiology was idiopathic sensory-neural hearing loss. They showed positive results in the Auditory Lateralization Test. In the Speech Test, word recognition in noise improved from 2% preoperatively to 61.1% at a mean follow-up of 1 year (S0 condition) in children [test with signal in CI side 60% and signal normal hearing side (plugged) 31%]. The processor was used for >12 h in all cases. With respect to the SSQ questionnaire, parents were more satisfied within the postoperative period than within the preoperative period. For adults, the most common etiology was idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Positive results in the Auditory Lateralization Test were found. With respect to the Speech Test in quiet conditions: Word recognition in noise improved from 5.7% preoperatively to 71.8% at a mean follow-up of 1 year [test with signal in CI side 68% and signal normal hearing side (plugged) 41%]. The processor was used for >12 h. In the SSQ questionnaire, the post-operative results showed a beneficial effect of the CI. No adverse events were reported during the study period. No differences were found between children and adults in all tests in this study. Conclusions: Cochlear implantation in post-lingually deaf adults and children with SSD can achieve a speech perception outcome comparable with CI in conventional candidates. Improvements in spatial hearing were also observed. Careful patient selection and counseling regarding potential benefits are important to optimize outcomes.

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

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

Cochlear Implant Use Remains Consistent Over Time in Children With Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES

To measure the acceptance of a cochlear implant by children with single-sided deafness (SSD) using datalogging technology in the cochlear implant processor.

DESIGN

Datalogs from follow-up clinical audiology appointments for 23 children with SSD were extracted from their cochlear implant processors ranging from 1 to 8 visits (M = 3.74, SD = 1.79). The number of hours the cochlear implant was in use per day, the number of times the coil disconnected from the internal device, and the percentage of daily cochlear implant use in different auditory environments were collected from the datalogs. Linear mixed-effects regressions were used to analyze the relationship between age, hearing experience, cochlear implant use, and coil-offs per day. Nonlinear regressions were conducted to evaluate cochlear implant use in different environments.

RESULTS

Children with SSD wore their cochlear implants for 6.22 (SD = 2.81; range = 0.0004 to 14.74) hours per day on average. No significant change in cochlear implant use was seen as the children grew older or gained more hearing experience. As hearing experience increased, the number of coil-offs per day was reduced. Preschoolers spent more time in "music" and "speech" and less time in "noise" and "quiet" than older and younger children while older children spent more time in "speech-in-noise."

CONCLUSIONS

Children with SSD consistently wear their cochlear implants. However, the auditory environments to which they are exposed vary over time. Regular cochlear implant use by this population suggests that it does not detract from a normal-hearing ear and that children with SSD appreciate access to bilateral input.

CI in single-sided deafness

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

Prospective cohort study on the predictors of fall risk in 119 patients with bilateral vestibulopathy

OBJECTIVES

To identify predictive factors for falls in patients with bilateral vestibulopathy (BV). Specific variables contributing to the general work-up of a vestibular patient were compared between BV patients experiencing falls and those who did not.

DESIGN

Prospective multi-centric cohort study.

SETTING

Department of Otorhinolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery at two tertiary referral centers: Antwerp University Hospital and Maastricht University Medical Center.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 119 BV patients were included. BV diagnosis was defined in accordance with the diagnostic BV criteria, established by the Bárány Society in 2017.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were divided into fallers and non-fallers, depending on the experience of one or more falls in the preceding 12 months. Residual vestibular function on caloric testing, rotatory chair testing, video head impulse test (vHIT) and cervical vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (cVEMP) was evaluated as a predictive factor for falls. Furthermore, hearing function (speech perception in noise (SPIN)), sound localization performance, etiology, disease duration, sport practice, scores on the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and the Oscillopsia Severity Questionnaire (OSQ) were compared between fallers and non-fallers.

RESULTS

Forty-five (39%) patients reported falls. In a sub-analysis in the patients recruited at UZA (n = 69), 20% experienced three or more falls and three patients (4%) suffered from severe fall-related injuries. The DHI score and the OSQ score were significantly higher in fallers. Residual vestibular function, SPIN, sound localization performance, etiology, disease duration, age and sport practice did not differ between fallers and non-fallers.

CONCLUSIONS

Falls and (severe) fall-related injuries are frequent among BV patients. A DHI score > 47 and an OSQ score > 27.5 might be indicative for BV patients at risk for falls, with a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 60%. Residual vestibular function captured by single vestibular tests (vHIT, calorics, rotatory chair, cVEMP) or by overall vestibular function defined as the number of impaired vestibular sensors are not suitable to distinguish fallers and non-fallers in a BV population.

What can we learn from adult cochlear implant recipients with single-sided deafness who became elective non-users?

Objective: This retrospective study investigates the incidence of elective cochlear implant (CI) non-use amongst a cohort of adult CI recipients with single-sided deafness (SSD), identifies the causes that led to non-use, and assesses how non-use could be prevented. Methods: All adults with SSD who received a CI between 2008 and 2018 and who became elective CI non-users were included. Elective non-users were defined as CI recipients who decided to stop using their CI or, if explantation was necessary, refused reimplantation. Results: 5/114 (4.4%) adults with SSD who received a CI became elective non-users. The 5 non-users were a mean 44.2 years old (range 33-70 years) at implantation, had a mean duration of deafness of 7.1 years (range 0.5-20 years) at implantation, and used their CI for a mean 11.5 months (range 1.5-60 months) before (fully) discontinuing use. The primary cause of elective non-use was postoperative discouragement due to unrealistic expectations (4 participants) regarding sound perception with the CI or about the greater than expected level of commitment necessary for rehabilitation. Conclusions: Elective non-use among adult CI recipients with single-sided deafness was very rare and could be further prevented by comprehensive counselling to ensure that candidates have realistic expectations about the rehabilitation requirements and the outcomes with the CI.

Cortical auditory responses according to hearing rehabilitation in unilateral hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of rehabilitation systems (CROS: Contralateral Routing of Signal; BAHA: Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid; CI: cochlear implant) on cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEP) and auditory performance in unilateral hearing loss.

SUBJECTS AND METHOD

Twenty-one adults with unilateral hearing loss, using CROS (n=6), BAHA (n=6) or CI (n=9), were included. Seven normal-hearing subjects served as controls. CAEPs were recorded for a (/ba/) speech stimulus; for patients, tests were conducted with and without their auditory rehabilitation. Amplitude and latency of the various CAEP components of the global field power (GFP) were measured, and scalp potential fields were mapped. Behavioral assessment used sentence recognition in noise, with and without spatial cues.

RESULTS

Only CI induced N1 peak amplitude change (P<0.05). CI and CROS increased polarity inversion amplitude in the contralateral ear, and frontocentral negativity on the scalp potential map. CI improved understanding when speech was presented to the implanted ear and noise to the healthy ear, and vice-versa.

CONCLUSION

Cochlear implantation had the greatest impact on CAEP morphology and auditory performance. A longitudinal study could analyze progression of cortical reorganization.

Evaluating the Long-Term Hearing Outcomes of Cochlear Implant Users With Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the long-term outcomes of cochlear implantation in individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) in terms of speech perception, subjective hearing performance, and sound localization.

METHODS

Thirty-four subjects with SSD were recruited across two large cochlear implant (CI) centers (Antwerp, Belgium and Perth, Australia). The long-term hearing outcomes (between 4 and 10 years of CI use) were evaluated using speech in noise tests, a subjective hearing performance questionnaire (Speech, Spatial and Qualities Questionnaire [SSQ12]), and sound localization tests.

RESULTS

Statistically significant improvements were observed in speech perception in noise and sound localization results postoperatively with the use of a CI in comparison to preoperative measurements. Subjective hearing abilities also significantly improved after long-term CI use.

CONCLUSION

Access to binaural hearing is important for subjects with SSD. CI users with SSD experience long-term benefits in speech understanding, sound localization, and quality of life.

Unilateral congenital hearing loss in children: Challenges and potentials

The estimated incidence of sensorineural hearing impairment (>40 dB HL) at birth is 1.86 per 1000 newborns in developed countries and 30-40% of these are unilateral. Profound sensorineural unilateral hearing impairment or single sided deafness (SSD) can be treated with a cochlear implant. However, this treatment is costly and invasive and unnecessary in the eyes of many. Very young children with SSD often do not exhibit language and cognitive delays and it is hard to imagine that neurocognitive skills will present difficulties with one good ear. In the current paper we review the most recent evidence on the consequences of unilateral hearing impairment for auditory and neurocognitive factors. While data of both adults and children are discussed, we focus on developmental factors, congenital deafness and a window of opportunity for intervention. We discuss which etiologies qualify for a cochlear implant and present our multi-center prospective study on cochlear implants in infants with one deaf ear. The large, state-of-the art body of research allows for evidence-based decisions regarding management of unilateral hearing loss in children.

Cochlear Implantation for Children and Adults with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

Cochlear implants (CIs) have proven to be a useful treatment option for individuals with severe-to-profound hearing loss by providing improved access to one's surrounding auditory environment. CIs differ from traditional acoustic amplification by providing information to the auditory system via electrical stimulation. Both postlingually deafened adults and prelingually deafened children can benefit from a CI; however, outcomes with a CI can vary. Numerous factors can impact performance outcomes with a CI. It is important for the audiologist to understand what factors might play a role and impact performance outcomes with a CI so that they can effectively counsel the recipient and their family, as well as establish appropriate and realistic expectations with a CI. This review article will discuss the CI candidacy process, CI programming and postoperative follow-up care, as well as considerations across the lifespan that may affect performance outcomes with a CI.

Cortical reorganization after cochlear implantation for adults with single-sided deafness

BACKGROUND

Adults with single sided deafness (SSD) have lost binaural function, which limits sound source localization, speech understanding in noise, and quality of life. For SSD patients, restoration of bilateral auditory input is possible only with a cochlear implant (CI). In this study, cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) and behavioral performance were measured in left-implanted (SSD-CI-L) and right-implanted (SSD-CI-R) patients before and after cochlear implantation. We hypothesized that improvements in behavioral performance would be accompanied by changes in CAEPs after cochlear implantation.

DESIGN

Prospective longitudinal study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

METHOD

Nine right-handed adult SSD CI patients participated in the study. CAEPs were recorded before cochlear implantation and at 6 and 12 months post-implantation. CAEPs were elicited using speech stimuli (/ba/) delivered in sound field at 70 dBA. Global field power (GFP) latency and amplitude were calculated for P1, N1 and P2 peaks at each test session. CAEP were analyzed at frontocentral (Cz) and temporal (P7, P8, T7 and T8) and mastoid electrodes (M1 and M2) contralateral to the CI ear. Behavioral measures (sentence recognition in noise, with and without spatial cues) were collected at the same test sessions as for CAEPs. Speech performance and CAEPs were also measured in a control group of normal-hearing (NH) subjects.

RESULTS

While increased N1 amplitude was observed in the scalp potential maps for GFP and Cz for SSD-CI-L patients after implantation, the changes were not statistically significant. Peak CAEP amplitude at electrodes to contralateral to the CI ear increased after cochlear implantation for all SSD-CI patients, but significant increases were observed only for mastoid sites. Peak latencies for some components at temporal and mastoid sites remained significantly longer than for the NH control group, even after cochlear implantation. For SSD-CI-R patients, P2 peak amplitude for baseline GFP and Cz was significantly lower than for the NH control group. A significant improvement for speech understanding in noise was observed at 12 months post-implantation when speech was presented to the CI ear and noise to the non-implanted ear.

CONCLUSION

After cochlear implantation, speech understanding significantly improved when speech and noise were spatially separated. The increased N1 amplitude for SSD-CI-L patients and the increased bilateral activation for all SSD-CI patients may reflect cortical reorganization and restoration of binaural function after one year of experience with the CI. However, because of the limited number of SSD patients, significant changes in cortical activity after cochlear implantation were often difficult to observe.

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

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

Towards a Unified Testing Framework for Single-Sided Deafness Studies: A Consensus Paper

BACKGROUND

While hearing aids for a contralateral routing of signals (CROS-HA) and bone conduction devices have been the traditional treatment for single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL), in recent years, cochlear implants (CIs) have increasingly become a viable treatment choice, particularly in countries where regulatory approval and reimbursement schemes are in place. Part of the reason for this shift is that the CI is the only device capable of restoring bilateral input to the auditory system and hence of possibly reinstating binaural hearing. Although several studies have independently shown that the CI is a safe and effective treatment for SSD and AHL, clinical outcome measures in those studies and across CI centers vary greatly. Only with a consistent use of defined and agreed-upon outcome measures across centers can high-level evidence be generated to assess the safety and efficacy of CIs and alternative treatments in recipients with SSD and AHL.

METHODS

This paper presents a comparative study design and minimum outcome measures for the assessment of current treatment options in patients with SSD/AHL. The protocol was developed, discussed, and eventually agreed upon by expert panels that convened at the 2015 APSCI conference in Beijing, China, and at the CI 2016 conference in Toronto, Canada.

RESULTS

A longitudinal study design comparing CROS-HA, BCD, and CI treatments is proposed. The recommended outcome measures include (1) speech in noise testing, using the same set of 3 spatial configurations to compare binaural benefits such as summation, squelch, and head shadow across devices; (2) localization testing, using stimuli that rove in both level and spectral content; (3) questionnaires to collect quality of life measures and the frequency of device use; and (4) questionnaires for assessing the impact of tinnitus before and after treatment, if applicable.

CONCLUSION

A protocol for the assessment of treatment options and outcomes in recipients with SSD and AHL is presented. The proposed set of minimum outcome measures aims at harmonizing assessment methods across centers and thus at generating a growing body of high-level evidence for those treatment options.

Consequences of Stimulus Type on Higher-Order Processing in Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users

Single-sided deaf subjects with a cochlear implant (CI) provide the unique opportunity to compare central auditory processing of the electrical input (CI ear) and the acoustic input (normal-hearing, NH, ear) within the same individual. In these individuals, sensory processing differs between their two ears, while cognitive abilities are the same irrespectively of the sensory input. To better understand perceptual-cognitive factors modulating speech intelligibility with a CI, this electroencephalography study examined the central-auditory processing of words, the cognitive abilities, and the speech intelligibility in 10 postlingually single-sided deaf CI users. We found lower hit rates and prolonged response times for word classification during an oddball task for the CI ear when compared with the NH ear. Also, event-related potentials reflecting sensory (N1) and higher-order processing (N2/N4) were prolonged for word classification (targets versus nontargets) with the CI ear compared with the NH ear. Our results suggest that speech processing via the CI ear and the NH ear differs both at sensory (N1) and cognitive (N2/N4) processing stages, thereby affecting the behavioral performance for speech discrimination. These results provide objective evidence for cognition to be a key factor for speech perception under adverse listening conditions, such as the degraded speech signal provided from the CI.