Effects of lower frequency-to-electrode allocations on speech and pitch perception with the hybrid short-electrode cochlear implant

Selective attention decoding in bimodal cochlear implant users

The growing group of cochlear implant (CI) users includes subjects with preserved acoustic hearing on the opposite side to the CI. The use of both listening sides results in improved speech perception in comparison to listening with one side alone. However, large variability in the measured benefit is observed. It is possible that this variability is associated with the integration of speech across electric and acoustic stimulation modalities. However, there is a lack of established methods to assess speech integration between electric and acoustic stimulation and consequently to adequately program the devices. Moreover, existing methods do not provide information about the underlying physiological mechanisms of this integration or are based on simple stimuli that are difficult to relate to speech integration. Electroencephalography (EEG) to continuous speech is promising as an objective measure of speech perception, however, its application in CIs is challenging because it is influenced by the electrical artifact introduced by these devices. For this reason, the main goal of this work is to investigate a possible electrophysiological measure of speech integration between electric and acoustic stimulation in bimodal CI users. For this purpose, a selective attention decoding paradigm has been designed and validated in bimodal CI users. The current study included behavioral and electrophysiological measures. The behavioral measure consisted of a speech understanding test, where subjects repeated words to a target speaker in the presence of a competing voice listening with the CI side (CIS) only, with the acoustic side (AS) only or with both listening sides (CIS+AS). Electrophysiological measures included cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) and selective attention decoding through EEG. CAEPs were recorded to broadband stimuli to confirm the feasibility to record cortical responses with CIS only, AS only, and CIS+AS listening modes. In the selective attention decoding paradigm a co-located target and a competing speech stream were presented to the subjects using the three listening modes (CIS only, AS only, and CIS+AS). The main hypothesis of the current study is that selective attention can be decoded in CI users despite the presence of CI electrical artifact. If selective attention decoding improves combining electric and acoustic stimulation with respect to electric stimulation alone, the hypothesis can be confirmed. No significant difference in behavioral speech understanding performance when listening with CIS+AS and AS only was found, mainly due to the ceiling effect observed with these two listening modes. The main finding of the current study is the possibility to decode selective attention in CI users even if continuous artifact is present. Moreover, an amplitude reduction of the forward transfer response function (TRF) of selective attention decoding was observed when listening with CIS+AS compared to AS only. Further studies to validate selective attention decoding as an electrophysiological measure of electric acoustic speech integration are required.

Bilateral hearing aid use is feasible in patients with well-preserved hearing who struggle to acclimate to combined electro-acoustic (hybrid) stimulation

OBJECTIVE

This report presents a case study of a patient who resumed bilateral hearing aid use after nearly four years of limited progress and subjective dissatisfaction with a hybrid cochlear implant device.

DESIGN

Case study.

STUDY SAMPLE

One patient.

RESULTS

The patient's post-operative objective and subjective abilities with bilateral hearing aids were better than with a hybrid cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the benefits of combined acoustic and electric hearing have been well-documented, this report presents a solution for those with well-preserved hearing and poor hybrid cochlear implant performance: returning to bilateral hearing aid use.

Phantom Stimulation for Cochlear Implant Users With Residual Low-Frequency Hearing

In cochlear implants (CIs), phantom stimulation can be used to extend the pitch range toward apical regions of the cochlea. Phantom stimulation consists of partial bipolar stimulation, in which current is distributed across two intracochlear electrodes and one extracochlear electrode as defined by the compensation coefficient σ. The aim of this study was, (1) to evaluate the benefit of conveying low-frequency information through phantom stimulation for cochlear implant (CI) subjects with low-frequency residual hearing using electric stimulation alone, (2) to compare the speech reception thresholds obtained from electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) and electric stimulation in combination with phantom stimulation (EPS), and (3) to investigate the effect of spectrally overlapped bandwidth of speech conveyed via simultaneous acoustic and phantom stimulation on speech reception thresholds.

Binaural Pitch Fusion in Children With Normal Hearing, Hearing Aids, and Cochlear Implants

OBJECTIVES

Binaural pitch fusion is the perceptual integration of stimuli that evoke different pitches between the ears into a single auditory image. Adults who use hearing aids (HAs) or cochlear implants (CIs) often experience abnormally broad binaural pitch fusion, such that sounds differing in pitch by as much as 3 to 4 octaves are fused across ears, leading to spectral averaging and speech perception interference. The main goal of this study was to measure binaural pitch fusion in children with different hearing device combinations and compare results across groups and with adults. A second goal was to examine the relationship of binaural pitch fusion to interaural pitch differences or pitch match range, a measure of sequential pitch discriminability.

DESIGN

Binaural pitch fusion was measured in children between the ages of 6.1 and 11.1 years with bilateral HAs (n = 9), bimodal CI (n = 10), bilateral CIs (n = 17), as well as normal-hearing (NH) children (n = 21). Depending on device combination, stimuli were pure tones or electric pulse trains delivered to individual electrodes. Fusion ranges were measured using simultaneous, dichotic presentation of reference and comparison stimuli in opposite ears, and varying the comparison stimulus to find the range that fused with the reference stimulus. Interaural pitch match functions were measured using sequential presentation of reference and comparison stimuli, and varying the comparison stimulus to find the pitch match center and range.

RESULTS

Children with bilateral HAs had significantly broader binaural pitch fusion than children with NH, bimodal CI, or bilateral CIs. Children with NH and bilateral HAs, but not children with bimodal or bilateral CIs, had significantly broader fusion than adults with the same hearing status and device configuration. In children with bilateral CIs, fusion range was correlated with several variables that were also correlated with each other: pure-tone average in the second implanted ear before CI, and duration of prior bilateral HA, bimodal CI, or bilateral CI experience. No relationship was observed between fusion range and pitch match differences or range.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that binaural pitch fusion is still developing in this age range and depends on hearing device combination but not on interaural pitch differences or discriminability.

Binaural Pitch Fusion: Binaural Pitch Averaging in Cochlear Implant Users With Broad Binaural Fusion

OBJECTIVES

Individuals who use hearing aids (HAs) or cochlear implants (CIs) can experience broad binaural pitch fusion, such that sounds differing in pitch by as much as 3 to 4 octaves are perceptually integrated across ears. Previously, it was shown in HA users that the fused pitch is a weighted average of the two monaural pitches, ranging from equal weighting to dominance by the lower pitch. The goal of this study was to systematically measure the fused pitches in adult CI users, and determine whether CI users experience similar pitch averaging effects as observed in HA users.

DESIGN

Twelve adult CI users (Cochlear Ltd, Sydney, Australia) participated in this study: six bimodal CI users, who wear a CI with a contralateral HA, and six bilateral CI users. Stimuli to HA ears were acoustic pure tones, and stimuli to CI ears were biphasic pulse trains delivered to individual electrodes. Fusion ranges, the ranges of frequencies/electrodes in the comparison ear that were fused with a single electrode (electrode 22, 18, 12, or 6) in the reference ear, were measured using simultaneous, dichotic presentation of reference and comparison stimuli in opposite ears, and varying the comparison stimulus. Once the fusion ranges were measured, the fused binaural pitch of a reference-pair stimulus combination was measured by finding a pitch match to monaural comparison stimuli presented to the paired stimulus ear.

RESULTS

Fusion pitch weighting in CI users varied depending on the pitch difference of the reference-pair stimulus combination, with equal pitch averaging occurring for stimuli closer in pitch and lower pitch dominance occurring for stimuli farther apart in pitch. The averaging region was typically 0.5 to 2.3 octaves around the reference for bimodal CI users and 0.4 to 1.5 octaves for bilateral CI users. In some cases, a bias in the averaging region was observed toward the ear with greater stimulus variability.

CONCLUSIONS

Fusion pitch weighting effects in CI users were similar to those observed previously in HA users. However, CI users showed greater inter-subject variability in both pitch averaging ranges and bias effects. These findings suggest that binaural pitch averaging could be a common underlying mechanism in hearing-impaired listeners.

Searching for the Sound of a Cochlear Implant: Evaluation of Different Vocoder Parameters by Cochlear Implant Users With Single-Sided Deafness

Cochlear implantation in subjects with single-sided deafness (SSD) offers a unique opportunity to directly compare the percepts evoked by a cochlear implant (CI) with those evoked acoustically. Here, nine SSD-CI users performed a forced-choice task evaluating the similarity of speech processed by their CI with speech processed by several vocoders presented to their healthy ear. In each trial, subjects heard two intervals: their CI followed by a certain vocoder in Interval 1 and their CI followed by a different vocoder in Interval 2. The vocoders differed either (i) in carrier type-(sinusoidal [SINE], bandfiltered noise [NOISE], and pulse-spreading harmonic complex) or (ii) in frequency mismatch between the analysis and synthesis frequency ranges-(no mismatch, and two frequency-mismatched conditions of 2 and 4 equivalent rectangular bandwidths [ERBs]). Subjects had to state in which of the two intervals the CI and vocoder sounds were more similar. Despite a large intersubject variability, the PSHC vocoder was judged significantly more similar to the CI than SINE or NOISE vocoders. Furthermore, the No-mismatch and 2-ERB mismatch vocoders were judged significantly more similar to the CI than the 4-ERB mismatch vocoder. The mismatch data were also interpreted by comparing spiral ganglion characteristic frequencies with electrode contact positions determined from postoperative computed tomography scans. Only one subject demonstrated a pattern of preference consistent with adaptation to the CI sound processor frequency-to-electrode allocation table and two subjects showed possible partial adaptation. Those subjects with adaptation patterns presented overall small and consistent frequency mismatches across their electrode arrays.

How Do You Deal With Uncertainty? Cochlear Implant Users Differ in the Dynamics of Lexical Processing of Noncanonical Inputs

OBJECTIVES

Work in normal-hearing (NH) adults suggests that spoken language processing involves coping with ambiguity. Even a clearly spoken word contains brief periods of ambiguity as it unfolds over time, and early portions will not be sufficient to uniquely identify the word. However, beyond this temporary ambiguity, NH listeners must also cope with the loss of information due to reduced forms, dialect, and other factors. A recent study suggests that NH listeners may adapt to increased ambiguity by changing the dynamics of how they commit to candidates at a lexical level. Cochlear implant (CI) users must also frequently deal with highly degraded input, in which there is less information available in the input to recover a target word. The authors asked here whether their frequent experience with this leads to lexical dynamics that are better suited for coping with uncertainty.

DESIGN

Listeners heard words either correctly pronounced (dog) or mispronounced at onset (gog) or offset (dob). Listeners selected the corresponding picture from a screen containing pictures of the target and three unrelated items. While they did this, fixations to each object were tracked as a measure of the time course of identifying the target. The authors tested 44 postlingually deafened adult CI users in 2 groups (23 used standard electric only configurations, and 21 supplemented the CI with a hearing aid), along with 28 age-matched age-typical hearing (ATH) controls.

RESULTS

All three groups recognized the target word accurately, though each showed a small decrement for mispronounced forms (larger in both types of CI users). Analysis of fixations showed a close time locking to the timing of the mispronunciation. Onset mispronunciations delayed initial fixations to the target, but fixations to the target showed partial recovery by the end of the trial. Offset mispronunciations showed no effect early, but suppressed looking later. This pattern was attested in all three groups, though both types of CI users were slower and did not commit fully to the target. When the authors quantified the degree of disruption (by the mispronounced forms), they found that both groups of CI users showed less disruption than ATH listeners during the first 900 msec of processing. Finally, an individual differences analysis showed that within the CI users, the dynamics of fixations predicted speech perception outcomes over and above accuracy in this task and that CI users with the more rapid fixation patterns of ATH listeners showed better outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Postlingually deafened CI users process speech incrementally (as do ATH listeners), though they commit more slowly and less strongly to a single item than do ATH listeners. This may allow them to cope more flexible with mispronunciations.

Binaural Pitch Fusion in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users

OBJECTIVES

Binaural pitch fusion is the fusion of stimuli that evoke different pitches between the ears into a single auditory image. Individuals who use hearing aids or bimodal cochlear implants (CIs) experience abnormally broad binaural pitch fusion, such that sounds differing in pitch by as much as 3-4 octaves are fused across ears, leading to spectral averaging and speech perception interference. The goal of this study was to determine if adult bilateral CI users also experience broad binaural pitch fusion.

DESIGN

Stimuli were pulse trains delivered to individual electrodes. Fusion ranges were measured using simultaneous, dichotic presentation of reference and comparison stimuli in opposite ears, and varying the comparison stimulus to find the range that fused with the reference stimulus.

RESULTS

Bilateral CI listeners had binaural pitch fusion ranges varying from 0 to 12 mm (average 6.1 ± 3.9 mm), where 12 mm indicates fusion over all electrodes in the array. No significant correlations of fusion range were observed with any subject factors related to age, hearing loss history, or hearing device history, or with any electrode factors including interaural electrode pitch mismatch, pitch match bandwidth, or within-ear electrode discrimination abilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral CI listeners have abnormally broad fusion, similar to hearing aid and bimodal CI listeners. This broad fusion may explain the variability of binaural benefits for speech perception in quiet and in noise in bilateral CI users.

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.

Integration of acoustic and electric hearing is better in the same ear than across ears

Advances in cochlear implant (CI) technology allow for acoustic and electric hearing to be combined within the same ear (electric-acoustic stimulation, or EAS) and/or across ears (bimodal listening). Integration efficiency (IE; the ratio between observed and predicted performance for acoustic-electric hearing) can be used to estimate how well acoustic and electric hearing are combined. The goal of this study was to evaluate factors that affect IE in EAS and bimodal listening. Vowel recognition was measured in normal-hearing subjects listening to simulations of unimodal, EAS, and bimodal listening. The input/output frequency range for acoustic hearing was 0.1–0.6 kHz. For CI simulations, the output frequency range was 1.2–8.0 kHz to simulate a shallow insertion depth and the input frequency range was varied to provide increasing amounts of speech information and tonotopic mismatch. Performance was best when acoustic and electric hearing was combined in the same ear. IE was significantly better for EAS than for bimodal listening; IE was sensitive to tonotopic mismatch for EAS, but not for bimodal listening. These simulation results suggest acoustic and electric hearing may be more effectively and efficiently combined within rather than across ears, and that tonotopic mismatch should be minimized to maximize the benefit of acoustic-electric hearing, especially for EAS.

Binaural pitch fusion: Pitch averaging and dominance in hearing-impaired listeners with broad fusion

Both bimodal cochlear implant and bilateral hearing aid users can exhibit broad binaural pitch fusion, the fusion of dichotically presented tones over a broad range of pitch differences between ears [Reiss, Ito, Eggleston, and Wozny. (2014). J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 15(2), 235-248; Reiss, Eggleston, Walker, and Oh. (2016). J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 17(4), 341-356; Reiss, Shayman, Walker, Bennett, Fowler, Hartling, Glickman, Lasarev, and Oh. (2017). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 143(3), 1909-1920]. Further, the fused binaural pitch is often a weighted average of the different pitches perceived in the two ears. The current study was designed to systematically measure these pitch averaging phenomena in bilateral hearing aid users with broad fusion. The fused binaural pitch of the reference-pair tone combination was initially measured by pitch-matching to monaural comparison tones presented to the pair tone ear. The averaged results for all subjects showed two distinct trends: (1) The fused binaural pitch was dominated by the lower-pitch component when the pair tone was either 0.14 octaves below or 0.78 octaves above the reference tone; (2) pitch averaging occurred when the pair tone was between the two boundaries above, with the most equal weighting at 0.38 octaves above the reference tone. Findings from two subjects suggest that randomization or alternation of the comparison ear can eliminate this asymmetry in the pitch averaging range. Overall, these pitch averaging phenomena suggest that spectral distortions and thus binaural interference may arise during binaural stimulation in hearing-impaired listeners with broad fusion.

Binaural pitch fusion: Comparison of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners

Binaural pitch fusion is the fusion of dichotically presented tones that evoke different pitches between the ears. In normal-hearing (NH) listeners, the frequency range over which binaural pitch fusion occurs is usually <0.2 octaves. Recently, broad fusion ranges of 1-4 octaves were demonstrated in bimodal cochlear implant users. In the current study, it was hypothesized that hearing aid (HA) users would also exhibit broad fusion. Fusion ranges were measured in both NH and hearing-impaired (HI) listeners with hearing losses ranging from mild-moderate to severe-profound, and relationships of fusion range with demographic factors and with diplacusis were examined. Fusion ranges of NH and HI listeners averaged 0.17 ± 0.13 octaves and 1.7 ± 1.5 octaves, respectively. In HI listeners, fusion ranges were positively correlated with a principal component measure of the covarying factors of young age, early age of hearing loss onset, and long durations of hearing loss and HA use, but not with hearing threshold, amplification level, or diplacusis. In NH listeners, no correlations were observed with age, hearing threshold, or diplacusis. The association of broad fusion with early onset, long duration of hearing loss suggests a possible role of long-term experience with hearing loss and amplification in the development of broad fusion.

Two Ears Are Not Always Better than One: Mandatory Vowel Fusion Across Spectrally Mismatched Ears in Hearing-Impaired Listeners

Hearing loss and auditory prostheses can alter auditory processing by inducing large pitch mismatches and broad pitch fusion between the two ears. Similar to integration of incongruent inputs in other sensory modalities, the mismatched, fused pitches are often averaged across ears for simple stimuli. Here, we measured parallel effects on complex stimulus integration using a new technique based on vowel classification in five bilateral hearing aid users and eight bimodal cochlear implant users. Continua between five pairs of synthetic vowels were created by varying the first formant spectral peak while keeping the second formant constant. Comparison of binaural and monaural vowel classification functions for each vowel pair continuum enabled visualization of the following frequency-dependent integration trends: (1) similar monaural and binaural functions, (2) ear dominance, (3) binaural averaging, and (4) binaural interference. Hearing aid users showed all trends, while bimodal cochlear implant users showed mostly ear dominance or interference. Interaural pitch mismatches, frequency ranges of binaural pitch fusion, and the relative weightings of pitch averaging across ears were also measured using tone and/or electrode stimulation. The presence of both large interaural pitch mismatches and broad pitch fusion was not sufficient to predict vowel integration trends such as binaural averaging or interference. The way that pitch averaging was weighted between ears also appears to be important for determining binaural vowel integration trends. Abnormally broad spectral fusion and the associated phoneme fusion across mismatched ears may underlie binaural speech perception interference observed in hearing aid and cochlear implant users.

Pitch adaptation patterns in bimodal cochlear implant users: over time and after experience

OBJECTIVES

Pitch plasticity has been observed in Hybrid cochlear implant (CI) users. Does pitch plasticity also occur in bimodal CI users with traditional long-electrode CIs, and is pitch adaptation pattern associated with electrode discrimination or speech recognition performance? The goals of this study were to characterize pitch adaptation patterns in long-electrode CI users, to correlate these patterns with electrode discrimination and speech perception outcomes, and to analyze which subject factors are associated with the different patterns.

DESIGN

Electric-to-acoustic pitch matches were obtained in 19 subjects over time from CI activation to at least 12 months after activation, and in a separate group of 18 subjects in a single visit after at least 24 months of CI experience. Audiometric thresholds, electrode discrimination performance, and speech perception scores were also measured.

RESULTS

Subjects measured over time had pitch adaptation patterns that fit one of the following categories: (1) "Pitch-adapting," that is, the mismatch between perceived electrode pitch and the corresponding frequency-to-electrode allocations decreased; (2) "Pitch-dropping," that is, the pitches of multiple electrodes dropped and converged to a similar low-pitch; and (3) "Pitch-unchanging," that is, the electrode pitches did not change. Subjects measured after CI experience had a parallel set of adaptation patterns: (1) "Matched-pitch," that is, the electrode pitch was matched to the frequency allocation; (2) "Low-pitch," that is, the pitches of multiple electrodes were all around the lowest frequency allocation; and (3) "Nonmatched-pitch," that is, the pitch patterns were compressed relative to the frequency allocations and did not fit either the matched-pitch or low-pitch categories. Unlike Hybrid CI users which were mostly in the pitch-adapting or matched-pitch category, the majority of bimodal CI users were in the latter two categories, pitch-dropping/low-pitch or pitch-unchanging/nonmatched-pitch. Subjects with pitch-adapting or matched-pitch patterns tended to have better low-frequency thresholds than subjects in the latter categories. Changes in electrode discrimination over time were not associated with changes in pitch differences between electrodes. Reductions in speech perception scores over time showed a weak but nonsignificant association with dropping-pitch patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Bimodal CI users with more residual hearing may have somewhat greater similarity to Hybrid CI users and be more likely to adapt pitch perception to reduce mismatch with the frequencies allocated to the electrodes and the acoustic hearing. In contrast, bimodal CI users with less residual hearing exhibit either no adaptation, or surprisingly, a third pattern in which the pitches of the basal electrodes drop to match the frequency range allocated to the most apical electrode. The lack of association of electrode discrimination changes with pitch changes suggests that electrode discrimination does not depend on perceived pitch differences between electrodes, but rather on some other characteristics such as timbre. In contrast, speech perception may depend more on pitch perception and the ability to distinguish pitch between electrodes, especially since during multielectrode stimulation, cues such as timbre may be less useful for discrimination.

Effects of Removing Low-Frequency Electric Information on Speech Perception With Bimodal Hearing

PURPOSE

The objective was to determine whether speech perception could be improved for bimodal listeners (those using a cochlear implant [CI] in one ear and hearing aid in the contralateral ear) by removing low-frequency information provided by the CI, thereby reducing acoustic-electric overlap.

METHOD

Subjects were adult CI subjects with at least 1 year of CI experience. Nine subjects were evaluated in the CI-only condition (control condition), and 26 subjects were evaluated in the bimodal condition. CIs were programmed with 4 experimental programs in which the low cutoff frequency (LCF) was progressively raised. Speech perception was evaluated using Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant words in quiet, AzBio sentences in background babble, and spondee words in background babble.

RESULTS

The CI-only group showed decreased speech perception in both quiet and noise as the LCF was raised. Bimodal subjects with better hearing in the hearing aid ear (< 60 dB HL at 250 and 500 Hz) performed best for words in quiet as the LCF was raised. In contrast, bimodal subjects with worse hearing (> 60 dB HL at 250 and 500 Hz) performed similarly to the CI-only group.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that reducing low-frequency overlap of the CI and contralateral hearing aid may improve performance in quiet for some bimodal listeners with better hearing.

Multicenter clinical trial of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 cochlear implant: Final outcomes

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The concept of expanding electrical speech processing to those with more residual acoustic hearing with a less-invasive shorter cochlear implant (CI) has been ongoing since 1999. A multicenter study of the Nucleus Hybrid S8 CI took place between 2002 and 2011. This report describes the final outcomes of this clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter, longitudinal, single-subject design.

METHODS

Eighty-seven subjects received a Nucleus Hybrid S8 CI in their poorer ear. Speech perception in quiet (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant [CNC] words) and in noise (Bamford-Kowal-Bench Sentences-In-Noise [BKB-SIN]) were collected pre- and postoperatively at 3, 6, and 12 months. Subjective questionnaire data using the Abbreviated Profile for Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) were also collected.

RESULTS

Some level of hearing preservation was accomplished in 98% subjects, with 90% maintaining a functional low-frequency pure-tone average (LFPTA) at initial activation. By 12 months, five subjects had total hearing loss, and 80% of subjects maintained functional hearing. CNC words demonstrated that 82.5% and 87.5% of subjects had significant improvements in the hybrid and combined conditions, respectively. The majority had improvements with BKB-SIN. Results also indicated that as long as subjects maintained at least a severe LFPTA, there was significant improvement in speech understanding. Furthermore, all subjects reported positive improvements in hearing in three of the four subscales of the APHAB.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of hybrid speech processing has significant advantages for subjects with residual low-frequency hearing. In this study, the Nucleus Hybrid S8 provided improved word understanding in quiet and noise. Additionally, there appears to be stability of the residual hearing after initial activation of the device.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2c.

Attenuated infrared neuron stimulation response in cochlea of deaf animals may associate with the degeneration of spiral ganglion neurons

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesize that degenerated spiral ganglion neurons (SGNs) in guinea pigs reduces auditory brainstem responses evoked by pulsed infrared stimulation.

BACKGROUND

Pulsed infrared laser excitation can directly evoke physiological responses in neuronal and other excitable cells in vivo and in vitro. Laser pulses could benefit patients with cochlear implants to stimulate the auditory system.

METHODS

Pulsed infrared lasers were used to study evoked optical auditory brainstem responses (oABRs) in normal hearing and deafened animals. Aslo, the morphology and anatomy of SGNs in normal hearing and deafened guinea pigs were compared.

RESULTS

By recording oABRs evoked by varying infrared laser pulse durations, it is suggested that degeneration of SGNs in deafened guinea pigs was associated with an elevated oABR threshold and with lower amplitudes. Moreover, oABR threshold decreased while amplitudes increased in both normal hearing and deafened animals as the pulse duration prolonged. Electron microscopy revealed that SGNs in deafened guinea pigs had swollen and vacuolar mitochondria, as well as demyelinated soma and axons.

CONCLUSION

Infrared laser pulses can stimulate SGNs to evoke oABRs in guinea pigs. Deafened guinea pigs have elevated thresholds and smaller amplitude responses, likely a result of degenerated SGNs. Short pulse durations are more suitable to evoke responses in both normal hearing and deafened animals.

Abnormal binaural spectral integration in cochlear implant users

Bimodal stimulation, or stimulation of a cochlear implant (CI) together with a contralateral hearing aid (HA), can improve speech perception in noise However, this benefit is variable, and some individuals even experience interference with bimodal stimulation. One contributing factor to this variability may be differences in binaural spectral integration (BSI) due to abnormal auditory experience. CI programming introduces interaural pitch mismatches, in which the frequencies allocated to the electrodes (and contralateral HA) differ from the electrically stimulated cochlear frequencies. Previous studies have shown that some, but not all, CI users adapt pitch perception to reduce this mismatch. The purpose of this study was to determine whether broadened BSI may also reduce the perception of mismatch. Interaural pitch mismatches and dichotic pitch fusion ranges were measured in 21 bimodal CI users. Seventeen subjects with wide fusion ranges also conducted a task to pitch match various fused electrode-tone pairs. All subjects showed abnormally wide dichotic fusion frequency ranges of 1-4 octaves. The fusion range size was weakly correlated with the interaural pitch mismatch, suggesting a link between broad binaural pitch fusion and large interaural pitch mismatch. Dichotic pitch averaging was also observed, in which a new binaural pitch resulted from the fusion of the original monaural pitches, even when the pitches differed by as much as 3-4 octaves. These findings suggest that abnormal BSI, indicated by broadened fusion ranges and spectral averaging between ears, may account for speech perception interference and nonoptimal integration observed with bimodal compared with monaural hearing device use.

Plasticity in human pitch perception induced by tonotopically mismatched electro-acoustic stimulation

Under normal conditions, the acoustic pitch percept of a pure tone is determined mainly by the tonotopic place of the stimulation along the cochlea. Unlike acoustic stimulation, electric stimulation of a cochlear implant (CI) allows for the direct manipulation of the place of stimulation in human subjects. CI sound processors analyze the range of frequencies needed for speech perception and allocate portions of this range to the small number of electrodes distributed in the cochlea. Because the allocation is assigned independently of the original resonant frequency of the basilar membrane associated with the location of each electrode, CI users who have access to residual hearing in either or both ears often have tonotopic mismatches between the acoustic and electric stimulation. Here we demonstrate plasticity of place pitch representations of up to three octaves in Hybrid CI users after experience with combined electro-acoustic stimulation. The pitch percept evoked by single CI electrodes, measured relative to acoustic tones presented to the non-implanted ear, changed over time in directions that reduced the electro-acoustic pitch mismatch introduced by the CI programming. This trend was particularly apparent when the allocations of stimulus frequencies to electrodes were changed over time, with pitch changes even reversing direction in some subjects. These findings show that pitch plasticity can occur more rapidly and on a greater scale in the mature auditory system than previously thought possible. Overall, the results suggest that the adult auditory system can impose perceptual order on disordered arrays of inputs.

Feasibility of real-time selection of frequency tables in an acoustic simulation of a cochlear implant

OBJECTIVES

Perception of spectrally degraded speech is particularly difficult when the signal is also distorted along the frequency axis. This might be particularly important for post-lingually deafened recipients of cochlear implants (CIs), who must adapt to a signal where there may be a mismatch between the frequencies of an input signal and the characteristic frequencies of the neurons stimulated by the CI. However, there is a lack of tools that can be used to identify whether an individual has adapted fully to a mismatch in the frequency-to-place relationship and if so, to find a frequency table that ameliorates any negative effects of an unadapted mismatch. The goal of the proposed investigation is to test the feasibility of whether real-time selection of frequency tables can be used to identify cases in which listeners have not fully adapted to a frequency mismatch. The assumption underlying this approach is that listeners who have not adapted to a frequency mismatch will select a frequency table that minimizes any such mismatches, even at the expense of reducing the information provided by this frequency table.

DESIGN

Thirty-four normal-hearing adults listened to a noise-vocoded acoustic simulation of a CI and adjusted the frequency table in real time until they obtained a frequency table that sounded "most intelligible" to them. The use of an acoustic simulation was essential to this study because it allowed the authors to explicitly control the degree of frequency mismatch present in the simulation. None of the listeners had any previous experience with vocoded speech, in order to test the hypothesis that the real-time selection procedure could be used to identify cases in which a listener has not adapted to a frequency mismatch. After obtaining a self-selected table, the authors measured consonant nucleus consonant word-recognition scores with that self-selected table and two other frequency tables: a "frequency-matched" table that matched the analysis filters with the noisebands of the noise-vocoder simulation, and a "right information" table that is similar to that used in most CI speech processors, but in this simulation results in a frequency shift equivalent to 6.5 mm of cochlear space.

RESULTS

Listeners tended to select a table that was very close to, but shifted slightly lower in frequency from the frequency-matched table. The real-time selection process took on average 2 to 3 min for each trial, and the between-trial variability was comparable with that previously observed with closely related procedures. The word-recognition scores with the self-selected table were clearly higher than with the right-information table and slightly higher than with the frequency-matched table.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-time self-selection of frequency tables may be a viable tool for identifying listeners who have not adapted to a mismatch in the frequency-to-place relationship, and to find a frequency table that is more appropriate for them. Moreover, the small but significant improvements in word-recognition ability observed with the self-selected table suggest that these listeners based their selections on intelligibility rather than some other factor. The within-subject variability in the real-time selection procedure was comparable with that of a genetic algorithm, and the speed of the real-time procedure appeared to be faster than either a genetic algorithm or a simplex procedure.