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

A cost-utility analysis of cochlear implants for single sided deafness in adults and children in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Cochlear Implant (CI) has been shown to improve speech comprehension, sound localization and tinnitus in adults with Single-Sided-Deafness (SSD) compared to standard treatment currently available in the Dutch setting such as a CROS (Contralateral Routing of Signals) hearing device or a BCD (Bone Conduction Device). Also, for the pediatric population with SSD, CI has shown to be clinically meaningful. Because currently no information is available on the health economic effects of CI in adults and children with SSD in the Netherlands, a cost-utility analysis was conducted.

METHODS

We developed a Markov cohort model, for both the adult and pediatric SSD population, with three states: implant, no implant, and dead. CI was compared with the Bone Conduction Device (BCD) treatment, requiring surgery and no specific treatment. The time horizon of the model was lifelong, costs were discounted with 3% and effects with 1.5%. A societal perspective was taken, including productivity costs in the analysis, with costing data based on publicly available prices for the Netherlands. Values for clinical outcome parameters, i.e. hearing gain, and event probabilities were based on existing literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses as well as scenario analyses were performed to outline uncertainty of individual and combined parameters.

RESULTS

Mean per patient costs for CI in the adult population were €194,051 (95%-CrI €177,274 to €211,108) compared to the total costs of €185,310 (95%-CrI €182,367 to €194,142) for BCD resulting in a cost difference of €8,826 (95%-CrI -€5,020 to €18,252). Compared to no treatment, the cost difference was -€25,089 (95%-CrI -€31,678 to -€6,003). Adults who were treated with CI gained 18.41 (95%-CrI 18.07 to 18.75) quality adjusted life years (QALY) whereas BCD patients gained 15.81 QALYs (95%-CrI 15.53 to 16.10), a difference of 2.60 QALYs (95%-CrI 2.15 to 3.05). The Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for adults with CI was determined to be €3,494/QALY gained. Patient without treatment gained 13.46 QALY (95%-CrI 13.20 to 13.73), a difference of 4.95 (95%-CrI 4.87 to 5.01) resulting in CI dominating no treatment. The ICER remained below the Dutch threshold of €20,000/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the results. For children, CI dominated when compared to BCD and when compared to no treatment. Compared to BCD, CI led to a cost saving of €29,611 (95%-CrI -€126,800 to €54,375) and compared to no treatment, CI resulted in a cost saving of €57,658 (95%-CrI -€146,687 to €5,919). The incremental QALY gain compared to BCD was 7.22 (95%-CrI 4.19 to 8.55) and 26.03 (95%-CrI 20.82 to 31.06) compared to no treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this health economic evaluation with a Markov cohort model, it is very likely that CI is cost-effective compared to BCD and to no treatment in the Dutch adult and pediatric population with SSD. In both populations the ICER was below the Dutch cost-effectiveness threshold of €20,000/QALY.

Holistic assessment of cochlear implant outcomes using the international classification of functioning disability and health model: data analysis of a longitudinal prospective multicenter study

PURPOSE

To study outcome after cochlear implantation using the Cochlear Implant (CI) outcome assessment protocol based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model (CI-ICF).

METHODS

Raw data of a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter study was analyzed. Seventy-two CI candidates were assessed preoperatively and six months postoperatively using the CI-ICF protocol. Following tools were used: (1) Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ), (2) Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), (3) Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ), (4) Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12), (5) Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (HISQUI19), (6) Nijmegen CI Questionnaire (NCIQ) (7) pure tone audiometry, (8) speech audiometry, (9) sound localization.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement of speech discrimination in quiet (p = 0.015; p < 0.001) and in noise (p = 0.041; p < 0.001), sound detection (p < 0.001), tinnitus (p = 0.026), listening (p < 0.001), communicating with-receiving-spoken messages (p < 0.001), conversation (p < 0.001), family relationships (p < 0.001), community life (p = 0.019), NCIQ total score and all subdomain scores (p < 0.001). Subjective sound localization significantly improved (p < 0.001), while psychometric sound localization did not. There was no significant subjective deterioration of vestibular functioning and no substantial change in sound aversiveness. CI users reported a high level of implant satisfaction postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the positive impact of cochlear implantation on auditory performance, communication, and subjective well-being. The CI-ICF protocol provides a holistic and comprehensive view of the evolution of CI outcomes.

[Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) - With the "Second" You Hear Better]

Single-sided deafness (SSD) is characterised by deafness in one ear while the other ear has normal hearing. The most common cause in congenital SSD is aplasia of the auditory nerve, and in post-lingual SSD idiopathic hearing loss. Patients with SSD mainly suffer from impaired sound localisation and difficulties in speech perception in noise. There are various therapy options, but binaural hearing is only possible with a cochlear implant (CI).

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

PURPOSE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Tinnitus reduction after active bone-conduction implantation in patients with single-sided deafness: a prospective multicenter study

PURPOSE

Single-sided deafness (SSD) presents significant challenges for patients, including compromised sound localization, reduced speech recognition, and often, tinnitus. These issues are typically addressed using interventions such as cochlear implantation (CI) and bone conduction implant (BCI). However, evidence regarding the efficacy of BCI in reducing tinnitus in SSD patients remains limited. This study explored the ability of a novel active transcutaneous BCI (Bonebridge BCI602) to alleviate tinnitus in SSD patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort multicenter study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospitals.

METHODS

A prospective multicenter study of 30 SSD patients was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups: those with (n = 19) and without (n = 11) tinnitus. Audiometric assessments, subjective questionnaires including the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness (BBSS), and tinnitus evaluations with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) and tinnitogram were conducted before and after BCI surgery.

RESULTS

THI scores after surgery were significantly reduced in SSD patients with tinnitus. Subjective satisfaction improved in both the tinnitus and non-tinnitus groups; however, the former group exhibited a significantly greater improvement in the APHAB questionnaire score. According to tinnitograms, the loudness of tinnitus decreased, particularly in patients with ipsilateral tinnitus. Patients with residual hearing had greater reductions in their THI scores. However, three patients without residual hearing had a relative worsening of tinnitus after surgery.

CONCLUSION

The Bonebridge BCI602 effectively reduced tinnitus in SSD patients, particularly in those with residual hearing. Subjective satisfaction improved in both the tinnitus and non-tinnitus groups. These findings demonstrate the therapeutic potential of BCI for managing SSD and associated tinnitus.

[Speech discrimination with separated signal sources and sound localization with speech stimuli : Learning effects and reproducibility]

BACKGROUND

Binaural hearing enables better speech comprehension in noisy environments and is necessary for acoustic spatial orientation. This study investigates speech discrimination in noise with separated signal sources and measures sound localization. The aim was to study characteristics and reproducibility of two selected measurement techniques which seem to be suitable for description of the aforementioned aspects of binaural hearing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Speech reception thresholds (SRT) in noise and test-retest reliability were collected from 55 normal-hearing adults for a spatial setup of loudspeakers with angles of ± 45° and ± 90° using the Oldenburg sentence test. The investigations of sound localization were conducted in a semicircle and fullcircle setup (7 and 12 equidistant loudspeakers).

RESULTS

SRT (S-45N45: -14.1 dB SNR; S45N-45: -16.4 dB SNR; S0N90: -13.1 dB SNR; S0N-90: -13.4 dB SNR) and test-retest reliability (4 to 6 dB SNR) were collected for speech intelligibility in noise with separated signals. The procedural learning effect for this setup could only be mitigated with 120 training sentences. Significantly smaller SRT values, resulting in better speech discrimination, were found for the test situation of the right compared to the left ear. RMS values could be gathered for sound localization in the semicircle (1,9°) as well as in the fullcircle setup (11,1°). Better results were obtained in the retest of the fullcircle setup.

CONCLUSION

When using the Oldenburg sentence test in noise with spatially separated signals, it is mandatory to perform a training session of 120 sentences in order to minimize the procedural learning effect. Ear-specific SRT values for speech discrimination in noise with separated signal sources are required, which is probably due to the right-ear advantage. A training is recommended for sound localization in the fullcircle setup.

Clinical experience of an adhesive bone conduction hearing system in children with congenital single-sided deafness

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the effects of an adhesive bone conduction device (aBCD) in children with congenital single-sided deafness (SSD). Specifically, we examined whether the aBCD elicits improvement in the speech perception ability of children with congenital SSD and whether using this device would adversely affect the horizontal localisation abilities of these children.

METHODS

Thirteen school-aged children with SSD and seven children with Normal Hearing (NH) were included in this study. Speech perception in noise was measured using the Mandarin Speech Test Materials and sound localisation performance was evaluated using broadband noise stimuli (0.5-20 kHz), randomly played from seven loudspeakers at different stimulus levels (65-, 70-, and 75-dB SPL).

RESULTS

All children with SSD showed inferior speech perception and sound localisation performance compared with children with NH. The aBCD use remarkably improved the speech perception abilities of these children under quiet and noise conditions; however, their sound localisation abilities neither improved nor deteriorated.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals the effectiveness and safety of a non-surgical aBCD in paediatric patients with SSD. Our results provide a theoretical basis for early hearing intervention with an aBCD in children with congenital SSD who are temporarily unable to undergo ear surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

The effect of cochlear implantation on tinnitus in patients with post lingual bilateral profound hearing loss

INTRODUCTION

In this study we investigated the effect of cochlear implantation on tinnitus in patients with post lingual bilateral profound hearing loss.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 66 post-lingual deaf patients over 18 years old who referred for cochlear implantation and complained of tinnitus were included. Patients were divided into two groups with residual hearing (in frequency 250-500 Hz) and without residual hearing. All data including age, gender, type of implants, type of surgery, cause of the disease, and information on the THI score before cochlear implantation, one month after cochlear implantation and one year after cochlear implantation was recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Nine patients had residual hearing, while 57 patients did not. After one month and one year, in both groups, the mean THI score has decreased significantly (p-value = 0.001), but there was no significant difference in the mean THI score before surgery and one month and one year after surgery between two groups with and without residual hearing. There was no significant difference in tinnitus severity according to THI-grade between two groups. Also there was no significant difference in THI score and the cause of the hearing loss, type and insertion method of implantation, one month and one year after the surgery between two groups.

CONCLUSION

According to our results, the was no significant correlation between residual hearing and tinnitus score before surgery, one month and one year after the surgery.

Investigating the Utility of a Compact Loudspeaker Array for Audiometric Testing

PURPOSE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Prospective study of sound localisation in patients with single sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss treated with cochlear implant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Sound localization plays a crucial role in our daily lives, enabling us to recognize voices, respond to alarming situations, avoid dangers, and navigate towards specific signals. However, this ability is compromised in patients with Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) and Asymmetric Hearing Loss (AHL), negatively impacting their daily functioning. The main objective of the study was to quantify the degree of sound source localization in patients with single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss using a Cochlear Implant (CI) and to compare between the two subgroups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational, single-center study involving adult patients diagnosed with profound unilateral or asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss who underwent cochlear implantation. Sound localization was assessed in a chamber equipped with seven speakers evenly distributed from -90º to 90º. Stimuli were presented at 1000 Hz and intensities of 65 dB, 70 dB, and 75 dB. Each stimulus was presented only once per speaker, totaling 21 presentations. The number of correct responses at different intensities was recorded, and angular error in degrees was calculated to determine the mean angular distance between the patient-indicated speaker and the speaker presenting the stimulus. Both assessments were conducted preoperatively without a cochlear implant and two years post-implantation.

RESULTS

The total sample comprised 20 patients, with 9 assigned to the SSD group and 11 to the AHL group. The Preoperative Pure Tone Average (PTA) in free field was 31.7 dB in the SSD group and 41.8 dB in the AHL group. There was a statistically significant improvement in sound localization ability and angular error with the use of the cochlear implant at all intensities in both SSD and AHL subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation in patients with SSD and AHL enhances sound localization, reducing mean angular error and increasing the number of correct sound localization responses.

Auditory capacity of the better-hearing ear in asymmetric hearing loss

PURPOSE

Our aim was to investigate the course of the hearing capacity of the better-hearing ear in single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) over time, in a multicenter study.

METHODS

We included 2086 pure-tone audiograms from 323 patients with SSD and AHL from four hospitals and 156 private practice otorhinolaryngologists. We collected: age, gender, etiology, duration of deafness, treatment with CI, number and monosyllabic speech recognition, numerical rating scale (NRS) of tinnitus intensity, and the tinnitus questionnaire according to Goebel and Hiller. We compared the pure tone audiogram of the better-hearing ear in patients with SSD with age- and gender-controlled hearing thresholds from ISO 7029:2017.

RESULTS

First, individuals with SSD showed a significantly higher hearing threshold from 0.125 to 8 kHz in the better-hearing ear compared to the ISO 7029:2017. The duration of deafness of the poorer-hearing ear showed no relationship with the hearing threshold of the better-hearing ear. The hearing threshold was significantly higher in typically bilaterally presenting etiologies (chronic otitis media, otosclerosis, and congenital hearing loss), except for Menière's disease. Second, subjects that developed AHL did so in 5.19 ± 5.91 years and showed significant reduction in monosyllabic word and number recognition.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with SSD show significantly poorer hearing in the better-hearing ear than individuals with NH from the ISO 7029:2017. In clinical practice, we should, therefore, inform our SSD patients that their disease is accompanied by a reduced hearing capacity on the contralateral side, especially in certain etiologies.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Efficacy of the Bonebridge BCI602 for Adult Patients with Single-sided Deafness: A Prospective Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of a novel active transcutaneous bone conduction implant (BCI) device for patients with single-sided deafness (SSD).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospitals.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter study was conducted at 15 institutions nationwide. Thirty adult (aged ≥19 years) SSD patients were recruited. They underwent implantation of an active transcutaneous BCI device (Bonebridge BCI602). Objective outcomes included aided pure-tone thresholds, aided speech discrimination scores (SDSs), and the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) and sound localization test results. The Bern Benefit in Single-Sided Deafness (BBSS) questionnaire, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire, and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) were used to measure subjective benefits.

RESULTS

The mean aided pure-tone threshold was 34.2 (11.3), mean (SD), dB HL at 500 to 4000 Hz. The mean total BBSS score was 27.5 (13.8). All APHAB questionnaire domain scores showed significant improvements: ease of communication, 33.6 (23.2) versus 22.6 (21.3), P = .025; reverberation, 44.8 (16.6) versus 32.8 (15.9), P = .002; background noise, 55.5 (23.6) versus 35.2 (18.1), P < .001; and aversiveness, 36.7 (22.8) versus 25.8 (21.4), P = .028. Moreover, the THI scores were significantly reduced [47.4 (30.1) versus 31.1 (27.0), P = .003]. Congenital SSD was a significant factor of subjective benefit (-11.643; 95% confidence interval: -21.946 to -1.340).

CONCLUSION

The BCI602 active transcutaneous BCI device can provide functional hearing gain without any adverse effects and is a feasible option for acquired SSD patients with long-term deafness.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

Single-Sided Deafness and Hearing Rehabilitation Modalities: Contralateral Routing of Signal Devices, Bone Conduction Devices, and Cochlear Implants

Single sided deafness (SSD) is characterized by significant sensorineural hearing loss, severe or profound, in only one ear. SSD adversely affects various aspects of auditory perception, including causing impairment in sound localization, difficulties with speech comprehension in noisy environments, and decreased spatial awareness, resulting in a significant decline in overall quality of life (QoL). Several treatment options are available for SSD, including cochlear implants (CI), contralateral routing of signal (CROS), and bone conduction devices (BCD). The lack of consensus on outcome domains and measurement tools complicates treatment comparisons and decision-making. This narrative overview aims to summarize the treatment options available for SSD in adult and pediatric populations, discussing their respective advantages and disadvantages. Rerouting devices (CROS and BCD) attenuate the effects of head shadow and improve sound awareness and signal-to-noise ratio in the affected ear; however, they cannot restore binaural hearing. CROS devices, being non-implantable, are the least invasive option. Cochlear implantation is the only strategy that can restore binaural hearing, delivering significant improvements in speech perception, spatial localization, tinnitus control, and overall QoL. Comprehensive preoperative counseling, including a discussion of alternative technologies, implications of no treatment, expectations, and auditory training, is critical to optimizing therapeutic outcomes.

Effects of Auditory Training on Speech Recognition in Children with Single-Sided Deafness and Cochlea Implants Using a Direct Streaming Device: A Pilot Study

Treating individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) with a cochlear implant (CI) offers significant benefits for speech perception in complex spatial listening environments. After implantation, training without involvement of the normal-hearing ear is essential. Therefore, the AudioLink streaming device (MED-EL GmbH, Austria) can be used to connect the externally worn audio processor to media devices; thus, the auditory stimuli are directly streamed to the implanted ear. The aim was to test whether children with SSD, aged 5-12 years, accept this training method and whether auditory training, streamed directly via AudioLink using the Tiptoi device (Ravensburger GmbH., Ravensburg, Germany), improves speech recognition. A total of 12 children with SSD and implanted with a CI received Tiptoi training via AudioLink and were asked to practice daily for 10 min over a period of one month. All participants completed the training. The measurements employed to assess improvement included speech audiometry, speech, spatial, and quality of hearing scale for parents (SSQ P), and specially designed tasks crafted for this study. Daily training of 9.93 min was reported. The word recognition score (WRS) at 65 dB and 80 dB in aided condition significantly improved and the WRS streamed via AudioLink was significantly better after training. The speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale for parents (SSQ P questionnaire) showed significant improvement in the dimension of quality of hearing and overall gain. The outcomes of the Tiptoi tasks resulted in a significant benefit in both categories of the "recognition of sounds" and "understanding of sentences". The results are very encouraging and do not only show the positive uptake of daily training at home but also how this resulted in a significant improvement in subjective and objective measures for this rather short training period of one month only.

The functional impact of implantable hearing devices in patients with single-sided deafness

Introduction

Single-sided deafness (SSD) is associated with significant functional impairment such as listening speech in noise and localizing sound. To date, studies on the efficacy of CI and BCI for single-sided deafness are conflicting.

Objective

Thus, the objective of our study was to describe and compare the functional outcomes between these devices.

Methods

Thirteen subjects with SSD were prospectively recruited for our study. Six underwent CI and seven received BCI. Word recognition scores (WRS) and disease specific outcome measures were obtained pre-implantation, at 6, and 12 months.

Results

WRS improved both in quiet and in noise for CI and BCI recipients. On the contrary, CI recipients displayed improvement in Speech Spatial Quality (SSQ) scores. A decreasing trend of improvement in APHAB scores were observed for the BCI group.

Conclusion

BCI recipients showed a significant improvement in WRS (in noise). Conversely, CI recipients showed a great improvement in SSQ scores. These preliminary findings suggest that true binaural hearing can only be restored with CI for better SSQ performance. However, BCIs could be recommended to a sub-group of patients, if listening to speech in noise is a priority.

Variability in Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in a Large German Cohort With a Genetic Etiology of Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVES

The variability in outcomes of cochlear implantation is largely unexplained, and clinical factors are not sufficient for predicting performance. Genetic factors have been suggested to impact outcomes, but the clinical and genetic heterogeneity of hereditary hearing loss makes it difficult to determine and interpret postoperative performance. It is hypothesized that genetic mutations that affect the neuronal components of the cochlea and auditory pathway, targeted by the cochlear implant (CI), may lead to poor performance. A large cohort of CI recipients was studied to verify this hypothesis.

DESIGN

This study included a large German cohort of CI recipients (n = 123 implanted ears; n = 76 probands) with a definitive genetic etiology of hearing loss according to the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG)/Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guidelines and documented postoperative audiological outcomes. All patients underwent preoperative clinical and audiological examinations. Postoperative CI outcome measures were based on at least 1 year of postoperative audiological follow-up for patients with postlingual hearing loss onset (>6 years) and 5 years for children with congenital or pre/perilingual hearing loss onset (≤6 years). Genetic analysis was performed based on three different methods that included single-gene screening, custom-designed hearing loss gene panel sequencing, targeting known syndromic and nonsyndromic hearing loss genes, and whole-genome sequencing.

RESULTS

The genetic diagnosis of the 76 probands in the genetic cohort involved 35 genes and 61 different clinically relevant (pathogenic, likely pathogenic) variants. With regard to implanted ears (n = 123), the six most frequently affected genes affecting nearly one-half of implanted ears were GJB2 (21%; n = 26), TMPRSS3 (7%; n = 9), MYO15A (7%; n = 8), SLC26A4 (5%; n = 6), and LOXHD1 and USH2A (each 4%; n = 5). CI recipients with pathogenic variants that influence the sensory nonneural structures performed at or above the median level of speech performance of all ears at 70% [monosyllable word recognition score in quiet at 65 decibels sound pressure level (SPL)]. When gene expression categories were compared to demographic and clinical categories (total number of compared categories: n = 30), mutations in genes expressed in the spiral ganglion emerged as a significant factor more negatively affecting cochlear implantation outcomes than all clinical parameters. An ANOVA of a reduced set of genetic and clinical categories (n = 10) identified five detrimental factors leading to poorer performance with highly significant effects ( p < 0.001), accounting for a total of 11.8% of the observed variance. The single strongest category was neural gene expression accounting for 3.1% of the variance.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of the relationship between the molecular genetic diagnoses of a hereditary etiology of hearing loss and cochlear implantation outcomes in a large German cohort of CI recipients revealed significant variabilities. Poor performance was observed with genetic mutations that affected the neural components of the cochlea, supporting the "spiral ganglion hypothesis."

Postoperative optimization of cochlear implantation for single sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Identify and evaluate the effectiveness of methods for improving postoperative cochlear implant (CI) hearing performance in subjects with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL).

DATA SOURCES

Embase, PubMed, Scopus.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic review and narrative synthesis. English language studies of adult CI recipients with SSD and AHL reporting a postoperative intervention and comparative audiometric data pertaining to speech in noise, speech in quiet and sound localization were included.

RESULTS

32 studies met criteria for full text review and 6 (n = 81) met final inclusion criteria. Interventions were categorized as: formal auditory training, programming techniques, or hardware optimization. Formal auditory training (n = 10) found no objective improvement in hearing outcomes. Experimental CI maps did not improve audiologic outcomes (n = 9). Programed CI signal delays to improve synchronization demonstrated improved sound localization (n = 12). Hardware optimization, including multidirectional (n = 29) and remote (n = 11) microphones, improved sound localization and speech in noise, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Few studies meeting inclusion criteria and small sample sizes highlight the need for further study. Formal auditory training did not appear to improve hearing outcomes. Programming techniques, such as CI signal delay, and hardware optimization, such as multidirectional and remote microphones, show promise to improve outcomes for SSD and AHL CI users.

A Five-Decade Text Mining Analysis of Cochlear Implant Research: Where We Started and Where We Are Heading

Background and Objectives: Since its invention in the 1970s, the cochlear implant (CI) has been substantially developed. We aimed to assess the trends in the published literature to characterize CI. Materials and Methods: We queried PubMed for all CI-related entries published during 1970-2022. The following data were extracted: year of publication, publishing journal, title, keywords, and abstract text. Search terms belonged to the patient's age group, etiology for hearing loss, indications for CI, and surgical methodological advancement. Annual trends of publications were plotted. The slopes of publication trends were calculated by fitting regression lines to the yearly number of publications. Results: Overall, 19,428 CIs articles were identified. Pediatric-related CI was the most dominant sub-population among the age groups, with the highest rate and slope during the years (slope 5.2 ± 0.3, p < 0.001), while elderly-related CIs had significantly fewer publications. Entries concerning hearing preservation showed the sharpest rise among the methods, from no entries in 1980 to 46 entries in 2021 (slope 1.7 ± 0.2, p < 0.001). Entries concerning robotic surgery emerged in 2000, with a sharp increase in recent years (slope 0.5 ± 0.1, p < 0.001). Drug-eluting electrodes and CI under local-anesthesia have been reported only in the past five years, with a gradual rise. Conclusions: Publications regarding CI among pediatrics outnumbered all other indications, supporting the rising, pivotal role of CI in the rehabilitation of children with sensorineural hearing loss. Hearing-preservation publications have recently rapidly risen, identified as the primary trend of the current era, followed by a sharp rise of robotic surgery that is evolving and could define the next revolution.

Clinical characteristics and prognosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss in single-sided deafness patients

Background

Sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) is rare. The prognosis of the sole serviceable hearing ear is very important for these patients. However, the clinical characteristics and prognosis of SSNHL in SSD patients are not well-documented.

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the clinical features and treatment outcomes of SSNHL in SSD patients.

Methods

Clinical data of 36 SSD patients and 116 non-SSD patients with unilateral SSNHL from January 2013 to December 2022 were retrospectively investigated. The clinical characteristics of the SSD patients were analyzed. All SSD patients were treated with intratympanic steroids plus intravenous steroids. Pure-tone average (PTA) and word recognition score (WRS) before and after treatment were recorded. The hearing recovery of SSNHL in SSD patients in comparison with non-SSD patients was explored. Auditory outcomes in SSD patients with different etiologies were also compared.

Results

Initial hearing threshold showed no significant differences between the SSD group and the non-SSD group (66.41 ± 24.64 dB HL vs. 69.21 ± 31.48 dB HL, p = 0.625). The SSD group had a higher post-treatment hearing threshold (median (interquartile range, IQR) 53.13(36.56) dB HL) than the non-SSD group (median 32.50(47.5) dB HL, p < 0.01). Hearing gains (median 8.75(13.00) dB) and the rate of significant recovery (13.89%) were lower in the SSD group than in the non-SSD group (median 23.75(34.69) dB, 45.69%). The etiology of SSD was classified as SSNHL, special types of infection, chronic otitis media, and unknown causes. SSNHL accounted for the maximum proportion (38.9%) of causes of SSD in the SSD group. Hearing gains were lower in the SSNHL-SSD group than in other causes of the SSD group. A binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated that SSD serves as an indicator of unfavorable hearing recovery outcomes (OR = 5.264, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

The prognosis of SSNHL in SSD patients is unsatisfactory. SSNHL accounts for the maximum proportion of causes of SSD in this group of patients. For SSD patients caused by SSNHL, less hearing improvement after treatment was expected when SSNHL occurred in the contralateral ear in comparison with SSD patients with other causes.

Cochlear Implants for Single-Sided Deafness: Quality of Life, Daily Usage, and Duration of Deafness

OBJECTIVE

To report our experience for adults undergoing cochlear implantation (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD).

METHODS

This is a retrospective case series for adults with SSD who underwent CI between January 2013 and May 2021 at our institution. CNC and AzBio speech recognition scores, Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12), datalogging, and the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL)-10 Global measure were utilized.

RESULTS

Sixty-six adults underwent CI for SSD (median 51.3 years, range 20.0-74.3 years), and 57 (86.4%) remained device users at last follow-up. Compared to pre-operative performance, device users demonstrated significant improvement in speech recognition scores and achieved peak performance at six months post-activation for CNC (8.0% increased to 45.6%, p < 0.0001) and AzBio in quiet (12.2% increased to 59.5%, p < 0.0001). THI was decreased at 6 months post-implantation (58.1-14.6, p < 0.0001), with 77% of patients reporting improved or resolved tinnitus. Patients demonstrated improved SSQ12 scores as well as the disease-specific CIQOL-10 Global questionnaire. Duration of deafness was not associated with significant differences in speech recognition performance. Average daily wear time was positively associated with CNC and AzBio scores as well as post-operative CIQOL-10 scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Herein we present the largest cohort of adult CI recipients with SSD with data on speech recognition scores, tinnitus measures, and SSQ12. Novel insights regarding the correlation of datalogging, duration of deafness, and CI-specific quality of life (CIQOL-10) metrics are discussed. Data continue to support CI as an efficacious treatment option for SSD.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 133:2362-2370, 2023.

Feasibility of Virtual Reality-Based Auditory Localization Training With Binaurally Recorded Auditory Stimuli for Patients With Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES

To train participants to localize sound using virtual reality (VR) technology, appropriate auditory stimuli that contain accurate spatial cues are essential. The generic head-related transfer function that grounds the programmed spatial audio in VR does not reflect individual variation in monaural spatial cues, which is critical for auditory spatial perception in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD). As binaural difference cues are unavailable, auditory spatial perception is a typical problem in the SSD population and warrants intervention. This study assessed the applicability of binaurally recorded auditory stimuli in VR-based training for sound localization in SSD patients.

METHODS

Sixteen subjects with SSD and 38 normal-hearing (NH) controls underwent VR-based training for sound localization and were assessed 3 weeks after completing training. The VR program incorporated prerecorded auditory stimuli created individually in the SSD group and over an anthropometric model in the NH group.

RESULTS

Sound localization performance revealed significant improvements in both groups after training, with retained benefits lasting for an additional 3 weeks. Subjective improvements in spatial hearing were confirmed in the SSD group.

CONCLUSION

By examining individuals with SSD and NH, VR-based training for sound localization that used binaurally recorded stimuli, measured individually, was found to be effective and beneficial. Furthermore, VR-based training does not require sophisticated instruments or setups. These.

RESULTS

suggest that this technique represents a new therapeutic treatment for impaired sound localization.

Amplification of the poorer ear by StereoBiCROS in case of asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss: effect on tinnitus

Tinnitus is prevalent among patients suffering from Single-Sided Deafness (SSD) and Asymmetrical Hearing Loss (AHL). In addition to bothersome tinnitus in the poorer ear, these patients also report issues with understanding speech in noise and sound localization. The conventional treatment options offered to these patients to improve auditory abilities are cochlear implantation, bone conduction devices or Contralateral Routing Of Signal (CROS) hearing aids. It was recently found that the benefit of cochlear implantation for tinnitus associated with AHL/SSD was greater than the other two approaches. It is conceivable that the lack of stimulation provided to the poorer ear in these last approaches explains their modest impact on tinnitus perception. A new technology that combines the ability to reroute the sound from the poorer ear to the good ear (CROS system) while still stimulating the poorer ear with conventional sound amplification has recently been developed: the StereoBiCROS system. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of this new device on tinnitus. Twelve AHL and two SSD patients aged 70.7 ± 7.9 years with tinnitus were fitted with bilateral hearing aids that included 3 programs: Stereophonic, BiCROS and StereoBiCROS (CROS + bilateral amplification). The short-and long-term effect of the approach on tinnitus was assessed using a tinnitus Loudness Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), respectively. Both the VAS and the THI were used before and one month after the hearing aid fitting. Of the 14 patients who used their hearing aids daily (12.6 ± 1.6 h per day) the StereoBiCROS program was the most used program (81.8 ± 20.5% of the time). The average THI total score decreased from 47 (± 22) to 15 (± 16) (p = 0.002) and the VAS-Loudness score decreased from 7 (± 1) to 2 (± 2) (p < 0.001) after the one-month trial period. In conclusion, StereoBiCROS stimulation strategy seems to offer an effective alternative to reduce tinnitus handicap and loudness for patients with AHL/SSD and tinnitus. This effect may be driven by sound amplification of the poorer ear.

Predictable Factors of People with Asymmetrical Hearing Loss Wearing a Hearing Aid in the Worse Ear Only

In patients with bilateral asymmetrical hearing loss (AHL), where only one hearing aid is available, it is difficult to decide which ear to amplify. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of hearing aid use for AHL patients fitted with a hearing aid in their worse ear only. One-hundred-two adults with asymmetrical-mixed or sensorineural hearing loss were retrospectively included. AHL was classified into three subgroups: unilateral hearing loss (UHL) and AHL type 1 (AHL1) and type 2 (AHL2). The main outcome measures were (1) the time spent wearing a hearing aid, (2) the hearing in a noise test (HINT), (3) the sound localization test and (4) the Korean version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). The 1 kHz-hearing threshold of the better ear was significantly better in the successful users than in the intermittent users for UHL. Younger age was associated with significantly better outcomes than older for AHL1 and AHL2. Among the etiologies of AHL, sudden hearing loss was associated with significantly better outcomes of hearing aid use for AHL, UHL and AHL1 patients. In this study, the success rate and usage rates were 43.1% and 67.6% in AHL patients wearing a hearing aid in the worse ear. This study identified the hearing threshold of 1 kHz from the better ear, age and etiology of sudden hearing loss as audiometric and non-audiometric factors that affected the outcomes of hearing aid use.

A cortical biomarker of audibility and processing efficacy in children with single-sided deafness using a cochlear implant

The goals of the current study were to evaluate audibility and cortical speech processing, and to provide insight into binaural processing in children with single-sided deafness (CHwSSD) using a cochlear implant (CI). The P1 potential to acoustically-presented speech stimuli (/m/, /g/, /t/) was recorded during monaural [Normal hearing (NH), CI], and bilateral (BIL, NH + CI) listening conditions within a clinical setting in 22 CHwSSD (mean age at CI/testing 4.7, 5.7 years). Robust P1 potentials were elicited in all children in the NH and BIL conditions. In the CI condition: (1) P1 prevalence was reduced yet was elicited in all but one child to at least one stimulus; (2) P1 latency was prolonged and amplitude was reduced, consequently leading to absence of binaural processing manifestations; (3) Correlation between P1 latency and age at CI/testing was weak and not significant; (4) P1 prevalence for /m/ was reduced and associated with CI manufacturer and duration of CI use. Results indicate that recording CAEPs to speech stimuli in clinical settings is feasible and valuable for the management of CHwSSD. While CAEPs provided evidence for effective audibility, a substantial mismatch in timing and synchrony of early-stage cortical processing between the CI and NH ear remains a barrier for the development of binaural interaction components.

Quality of Life Impact of Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness: Assessing the Interrelationship of Objective and Subjective Measures

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect on quality of life (QOL) of cochlear implantation (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) using the first psychometrically developed CI-specific QOL tool for English-speaking patients and to assess its relationship to objective perceptual measures.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care medical center.

PATIENTS

English-speaking adults with SSD or AHL.

INTERVENTIONS

Unilateral CI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL) score, CI-alone speech-in-quiet (SIQ) score (CNC and AzBio), binaural speech-in-noise (SIN) threshold, binaural azimuthal sound localization (SL) error.

RESULTS

At the most recent postoperative evaluation (median, 9.3 months postimplantation), 25 of 28 subjects (89%) had a CIQOL improvement, with the improvement considered clinically beneficial (>3 points) for 18 of 28 subjects (64%). Group-mean CIQOL improvement was observed at the first postoperative visit and did not change significantly thereafter. Objective perceptual measures (SL, SIQ, SIN) continued to improve over 12 months after implantation. Linear mixed-model regression analyses showed a moderate positive correlation between SIN and SIQ improvements (r = 0.50 to 0.59, p < 0.0001) and a strong positive correlation between the improvement in the two SIQ measures (r = 0.89, p < 0.0001). No significant relationships were observed ( p > 0.05) among QOL or the objective perceptual measures.

CONCLUSIONS

QOL improved for the majority of subjects implanted for SSD and AHL. Different time courses for improvement in QOL and audiologic tests, combined with the lack of significant relationships among them, suggest that QOL outcomes reflect different aspects of the CI experience than those captured by speech-understanding and localization measures. SIQ may substitute for SIN when clinical constraints exist.

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.

Cochlear Implant Facilitates the Use of Talker Sex and Spatial Cues to Segregate Competing Speech in Unilaterally Deaf Listeners

OBJECTIVES

Talker sex and spatial cues can facilitate segregation of competing speech. However, the spectrotemporal degradation associated with cochlear implants (CIs) can limit the benefit of talker sex and spatial cues. Acoustic hearing in the nonimplanted ear can improve access to talker sex cues in CI users. However, it's unclear whether the CI can improve segregation of competing speech when maskers are symmetrically placed around the target (i.e., when spatial cues are available), compared with acoustic hearing alone. The aim of this study was to investigate whether a CI can improve segregation of competing speech by individuals with unilateral hearing loss.

DESIGN

Speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) for competing speech were measured in 16 normal-hearing (NH) adults and 16 unilaterally deaf CI users. All participants were native speakers of Mandarin Chinese. CI users were divided into two groups according to thresholds in the nonimplanted ear: (1) single-sided deaf (SSD); pure-tone thresholds <25 dB HL at all audiometric frequencies, and (2) Asymmetric hearing loss (AHL; one or more thresholds > 25 dB HL). SRTs were measured for target sentences produced by a male talker in the presence of two masker talkers (different male or female talkers). The target sentence was always presented via loudspeaker directly in front of the listener (0°), and the maskers were either colocated with the target (0°) or spatially separated from the target at ±90°. Three segregation cue conditions were tested to measure masking release (MR) relative to the baseline condition: (1) Talker sex, (2) Spatial, and (3) Talker sex + Spatial. For CI users, SRTs were measured with the CI on or off.

RESULTS

Binaural MR was significantly better for the NH group than for the AHL or SSD groups ( P < 0.001 in all cases). For the NH group, mean MR was largest with the Talker sex + spatial cues (18.8 dB) and smallest for the Talker sex cues (10.7 dB). In contrast, mean MR for the SSD group was largest with the Talker sex + spatial cues (14.7 dB), and smallest with the Spatial cues (4.8 dB). For the AHL group, mean MR was largest with the Talker sex + spatial cues (7.8 dB) and smallest with the Talker sex (4.8 dB) and the Spatial cues (4.8 dB). MR was significantly better with the CI on than off for both the AHL ( P = 0.014) and SSD groups ( P < 0.001). Across all unilaterally deaf CI users, monaural (acoustic ear alone) and binaural MR were significantly correlated with unaided pure-tone average thresholds in the nonimplanted ear for the Talker sex and Talker sex + spatial conditions ( P < 0.001 in both cases) but not for the Spatial condition.

CONCLUSION

Although the CI benefitted unilaterally deaf listeners' segregation of competing speech, MR was much poorer than that observed in NH listeners. Different from previous findings with steady noise maskers, the CI benefit for segregation of competing speech from a different talker sex was greater in the SSD group than in the AHL group.

Choice of treatment evaluated after trial periods with bone conduction devices and contralateral routing of sound systems in patients with single-sided deafness

Objectives

Patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) may experience difficulties with speech perception in noise, sound localization, have tinnitus and experience a reduced quality of life (QoL). contralateral routing of sound hearing aids (CROS) or bone conduction devices (BCD) may partly improve subjective speech communication and QoL in SSD patients. A trial period with these devices can help in making a well-informed choice of treatment. Our aim was to evaluate factors influencing the choice of treatment made after a BCD and CROS trial period in adult SSD patients.

Methods

Patients were randomized in the: "first BCD, then CROS" or "first CROS, then BCD" trial period group. After the BCD on headband and CROS were tested for 6 weeks each, patients choose for BCD, CROS or no treatment. Primary outcome was the distribution of choice of treatment. Secondary outcomes included the association between the choice of treatment and patient characteristics, reasons for treatment acceptance or rejection, device usage during the trial periods, and disease-specific QoL outcomes.

Results

Of 91 patients randomized, 84 completed both trial periods and made their choice of treatment: 25 (30%) BCD, 34 (40%) CROS, and 25 (30%) no treatment. No characteristics were found to be related to choice of treatment. Top three reasons for acceptance or rejection were: device (dis)comfort, sound quality and (dis)advantage of subjective hearing. Average daily device use during the trial periods was higher for CROS than for BCD. Choice of treatment was significantly related with both duration of device usage and greater improvement of QoL after the corresponding trial period.

Conclusion

The majority of SSD patients preferred BCD or CROS over no treatment. Evaluating device usage, discussing treatment (dis)advantages and disease-specific QoL outcomes after trial periods are to be considered during patient counseling and could facilitate whether to choose one of these treatments.

Level of evidence

1B.

Single-Sided Deafness: Emotional and Social Handicap, Impact on Health Status and Quality of Life, Functional Hearing, and the Effects of Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the functional and subjective outcomes in individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) treated with a cochlear implant (CI).

METHODS

Eighty-one adult CI users with SSD participated in this study. Functional assessments consisted of speech in noise testing and localization. Subjective assessments consisted of the Speech Spatial Quality of Hearing Scale, the Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaire, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults questionnaire, and the Glasgow Health Status Inventory and the Glasgow Benefit Inventory questionnaires.

RESULTS

SSD has remarkable consequences on quality of life (QoL) and imposes a substantial emotional and social handicap on the individuals. Self-reported QoL improved after CI with tinnitus intrusion significantly reduced as early as 3 months post-CI. A significant improvement was seen in all speech understanding in noise configurations. Localization ability significantly improved with CI on.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that SSD reduces social and psychological QoL and imposes a remarkable level of handicap as per general and specific self-assessments tool. CI provided a significant improvement in function including speech understanding in noise and localization ability, as well as improved QoL and reduced tinnitus significantly in both the early and long terms.

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.

Single-Sided Deafness: Using Cortical Auditory Evoked Potential to Improve Cochlear Implant Fitting

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if acoustic cortical auditory evoked potential (aCAEP) measures can be used to verify the cochlear implant (CI) map and consequently improve auditory outcomes in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD).

DESIGN

aCAEPs were measured in SSD-CI recipients using speech tokens /m/, /g/, /t/, and /s/. If aCAEP responses were present for all speech tokens at the outset, no map adjustments were implemented. If aCAEP responses were absent for one or more tokens, the map was adjusted until aCAEPs were observed for all four tokens. Speech in noise testing using BKB-SiN was performed before and after aCAEP recording. The results of the speech testing results at presurgery, 6, 12, and 24 months post-CI were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven CI users with SSD participated in this study. All CIs had been mapped according to the conventional subjective loudness perception method. Twenty-three SSD-CI users exhibited an aCAEP response for all four speech tokens and were therefore considered optimized at outset. Forty-four participants lacked an aCAEP response from at least one speech token and had their most comfortable levels adjusted accordingly. Of these, map adjustments allowed aCAEPs to be elicited for all four speech tokens in 23 individuals. Speech in noise testing significantly improved pre- to post-aCAEP-based adjustment.

CONCLUSION

aCAEP recordings were successfully used to verify CI mapping and improve resultant speech outcomes in SSD-CI users.

The Core Rehabilitation Outcome Set for Single-Sided Deafness (CROSSSD) study: International consensus on outcome measures for trials of interventions for adults with single-sided deafness

Background

Single-sided deafness (SSD) has functional, psychological, and social consequences. Interventions for adults with SSD include hearing aids and auditory implants. Benefits and harms (outcome domains) of these interventions are until now reported inconsistently in clinical trials. Inconsistency in reporting outcome measures prevents meaningful comparisons or syntheses of trial results. The Core Rehabilitation Outcome Set for Single-Sided Deafness (CROSSSD) international initiative used structured communication techniques to achieve consensus among healthcare users and professionals working in the field of SSD. The novel contribution is a set of core outcome domains that experts agree are critically important to assess in all clinical trials of SSD interventions.

Methods

A long list of candidate outcome domains compiled from a systematic review and published qualitative data, informed the content of a two-round online Delphi survey. Overall, 308 participants from 29 countries were enrolled. Of those, 233 participants completed both rounds of the survey and scored each outcome domain on a 9-point scale. The set of core outcome domains was finalised via a web-based consensus meeting with 12 participants. Votes involved all stakeholder groups, with an approximate 2:1 ratio of professionals to healthcare users participating in the Delphi survey, and a 1:1 ratio participating in the consensus meeting.

Results

The first round of the survey listed 44 potential outcome domains, organised thematically. A further five outcome domains were included in Round 2 based on participant feedback. The structured voting at round 2 identified 17 candidate outcome domains which were voted on at the consensus meeting. Consensus was reached for a core outcome domain set including three outcome domains: spatial orientation, group conversations in noisy social situations, and impact on social situations. Seventy-seven percent of the remaining Delphi participants agreed with this core outcome domain set.

Conclusions

Adoption of the internationally agreed core outcome domain set would promote consistent assessment and reporting of outcomes that are meaningful and important to all relevant stakeholders. This consistency will in turn enable comparison of outcomes reported across clinical trials comparing SSD interventions in adults and reduce research waste. Further research will determine how those outcome domains should best be measured.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06702-1.

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.

Masked Speech Recognition as a Function of Masker Location for Cochlear Implant Users With Single-Sided Deafness

PURPOSE

Cochlear implant (CI) recipients with normal or near normal hearing (NH) in the contralateral ear, referred to as single-sided deafness (SSD), experience significantly better speech recognition in noise with their CI than without it, although reported outcomes vary. One possible explanation for differences in outcomes across studies could be differences in the spatial configurations used to assess performance. This study compared speech recognition for different spatial configurations of the target and masker, with test materials used clinically.

METHOD

Sixteen CI users with SSD completed tasks of masked speech recognition presented in five spatial configurations. The target speech was presented from the front speaker (0° azimuth). The masker was located either 90° or 45° toward the CI-ear or NH-ear or colocated with the target. Materials were the AzBio sentences in a 10-talker masker and the Bamford-Kowal-Bench Speech-in-Noise test (BKB-SIN; four-talker masker). Spatial release from masking (SRM) was computed as the benefit associated with spatial separation relative to the colocated condition.

RESULTS

Performance was significantly better when the masker was separated toward the CI-ear as compared to colocated. No benefit was observed for spatial separations toward the NH-ear. The magnitude of SRM for spatial separations toward the CI-ear was similar for 45° and 90° when tested with the AzBio sentences, but a larger benefit was observed for 90° as compared to 45° for the BKB-SIN.

CONCLUSIONS

Masked speech recognition in CI users with SSD varies as a function of the spatial configuration of the target and masker. Results supported an expansion of the clinical test battery at the study site to assess binaural hearing abilities for CI candidates and recipients with SSD. The revised test battery presents the target from the front speaker and the masker colocated with the target, 90° toward the CI-ear, or 90° toward the NH-ear.

The Functional Hearing Gain with an Active Transcutaneous Bone Conduction Implant Does Not Correlate with the Subjective Hearing Performance

The functional hearing outcome with hearing implants does not always properly reflect the subjective benefit in everyday listening situations. In this study, the functional hearing gain and the impact on the subjective hearing ability and quality of life were assessed in patients with a Bonebridge. A chart review was performed on 45 patients with a Bonebridge who were provided with questionnaires regarding the hearing quality and health-related quality of life during their last clinical visit. The questionnaires consisted of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities (SSQ) and the Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3). Eleven patients had to be excluded due to missing data. A total of 34 patients (37 ears) were included in the study. Aided hearing thresholds were significantly lower compared with the unaided condition, with a mean functional gain of 26.87 dB for patients with mixed/conductive hearing loss (MHL/CHL). Although patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) scored slightly lower on the SSQ compared with patients with MHL/CHL, all included patients reported improved subjective hearing quality with the BB compared with the hearing situation before implantation. No correlation was found between the functional hearing gain and the subdomains of the SSQ. SSD patients scored the HUI3 subdomain “hearing” slightly lower compared with MHL/CHL patients. Although not significant, a relationship was found between the functional gain and the “hearing” subdomain. No correlation was found for the other subdomains of the HUI3. Audiological measurements showed significantly improved hearing thresholds with the Bonebridge. Most importantly, the subjective benefit achieved in everyday listening situations was superior compared with the previous hearing condition. The lack of correlation between subjective questionnaire results and the functional hearing gain shows the importance of assessing both audiological and subjective hearing quality parameters in clinical routine.

Lateralization Pattern of the Weber Tuning Fork Test in Longstanding Unilateral Profound Hearing Loss: Implications for Cochlear Implantation

The Weber tuning fork test is a standard otologic examination tool in patients with unilateral hearing loss. Sound should typically lateralize to the contralateral side in unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The observation that the Weber test does not lateralize in some patients with longstanding unilateral deafness has been previously described but remains poorly understood. In the present study, we conducted a retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients with unilateral profound hearing loss (single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss) for at least ten years. In this patient cohort, childhood-onset unilateral profound hearing loss was significantly associated with the lack of lateralization of the Weber tuning fork test (Fisher’s exact test, p < 0.05) and the absence of tinnitus in the affected ear (Fisher’s exact test, p < 0.001). The findings may imply a central adaptation process due to chronic unilateral auditory deprivation starting before the critical period of auditory maturation. This notion may partially explain the poor outcome of adult cochlear implantation in longstanding single-sided deafness. The findings may suggest a role for the Weber test as a simple, quick, and economical tool for screening poor cochlear implant candidates, thus potentially supporting the decision-making and counseling of patients with longstanding single-sided deafness.

Longitudinal auditory data of children with prelingual single-sided deafness managed with early cochlear implantation

Individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) have no access to binaural hearing, which limits their ability to localize sounds and understand speech in noisy environments. In addition, children with prelingual SSD are at risk for neurocognitive and academic difficulties. Early cochlear implantation may lead to improved hearing outcomes by restoring bilateral hearing. However, its longitudinal impact on the development of children with SSD remains unclear. In the current study, a group of young children with prelingual SSD received a cochlear implant at an early age. From the age of four, the children’s spatial hearing skills could be assessed using a spatial speech perception in noise test and a sound localization test. The results are compared to those of two control groups: children with SSD without a cochlear implant and children with bilateral normal hearing. Overall, the implanted group exhibited improved speech perception in noise abilities and better sound localization skills, compared to their non-implanted peers. On average, the children wore their device approximately nine hours a day. Given the large contribution of maturation to the development of spatial hearing skills, further follow-up is important to understand the long-term benefit of a cochlear implant for children with prelingual SSD.

Neural activity of the auditory cortex predicts speech recognition of patients with asymmetric hearing loss after cochlear implantation

Patients with asymmetric hearing loss show an asymmetry of glucose metabolism of the primary auditory cortex (PAC). We investigated whether this asymmetry could serve as an objective predictor for speech recognition with CI. Nine patients underwent ¹⁸FDG PET prior to CI surgery. Average normalized ¹⁸FDG uptake of 25% of voxels with highest uptake was calculated for the PAC employing a probabilistic atlas and cerebellar cortex as reference. Differences in glucose metabolism of the PAC were assessed by an asymmetry index (AI-PAC). We tested the correlation between outcome of CI surgery (6 months post implantation), AI-PAC and clinical predictors. Pre-operative AI-PAC showed a positive correlation with speech recognition with CI (significant for sentences and numbers; trend for monosyllabic words). With a pre-operative AI-PAC ≥ 4.2%, patients reached good CI outcome in sentence recognition of 59–90% and number recognition of 90–100% and less favorable CI outcome in monosyllabic word recognition of 25–45%. Age at symptom onset was significantly associated with all measures of speech recognition, while deafness duration was only associated with sentence recognition. AI-PAC allows for a reliable and quantitative pre-operative prediction of early improvement in speech recognition after CI. ¹⁸FDG PET may be a valuable addition to the objective pre-operative assessment of CI candidates. Further studies in larger cohorts and with longer follow-up times are needed.

Patient Sentiments Influencing Management Strategy for Single-sided Deafness

OBJECTIVE

Assess opinions that influence treatment choice for single sided deafness (SSD).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Tertiary neurotology referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients with SSD were recruited between December 2020 and February 2021. Included patients were self-selected by voluntary completion of the study questionnaire.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA), and a questionnaire containing 25 areas of inquiry relevant to management strategy decision making.

RESULTS

In comparison to the surgical management group, patients opting for nonsurgical amplification were significantly more concerned about device visibility (p = 0.005, 1.32 ± 0.22 versus 2.67 ± 0.37), undergoing surgery (p = 0.017, 1.64 ± 0.23 versus 2.89 ± 0.51), and the thought of harboring an implanted device (p = 0.003, 1.46 ± 0.22 versus 2.82 ± 0.35). Patients with a major hearing handicap (grade 2-4) placed significantly less emphasis on out-of-pocket costs (p = 0.049, 2.38 ± 0.17 versus 2.94 ± 0.21) and were less concerned about experiencing discomfort from the device (p = 0.033, 3.13 ± 0.11 versus 3.56 ± 0.16) or ease of device use (p = 0.040, 3.20 ± 0.13 versus 3.63 ± 0.13) when compared with the minor handicap group.

CONCLUSIONS

Lingering concerns about device visibility, undergoing surgery, and harboring an implanted device underscore the need for thorough patient counseling during SSD device selection consultations. These efforts should aim to address esthetic and surgical risk concerns while emphasizing the potential for improvements in quality of life.

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.

The impact of cochlear implantation on speech and language outcomes in children with asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss

INTRODUCTION

Cochlear implantation (CI) is considered in children with asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss (ASHL), or severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in one ear, and better hearing contralaterally. The benefits of a CI in these children are not well established. This study investigated the impact of unilateral CI on speech and language outcomes in pediatric patients with ASHL.

METHODS

The retrospective chart review identified pediatric patients who underwent cochlear implantation for ASHL at a tertiary single center institution between 2014 and 2017. Children who underwent cochlear implantation in the poorer ear and maintained a hearing aid in the better ear were included, while children with cognitive impairment or prior cochlear nerve deficiency and auditory neuropathy were excluded. Speech and language measures were evaluated prior to implantation and at regular six-month intervals postoperatively. Ear specific Audiometry was evaluated at every visit and varied developmentally appropriate speech recognition tasks, including questionnaires, closed-set, and open-set measures, accounted for advancing childhood milestones. Specific measures of speech articulation, expressive and receptive language, and vocabulary were assessed including: Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation (GFTA-3), Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals (CELF-P2 or CELF-5), Receptive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test (ROWPVT) and Expressive One Word Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT). The mean difference and standard deviation of speech and language outcomes at preoperative and postoperative evaluations were calculated. The change in outcomes were further assessed over each post-operative time point.

RESULTS

Twenty-six children with asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss were included in the analysis, with 11 (42%) having bilateral enlarged vestibular aqueducts (EVA). At time of CI, unaided mean Pure Tone Average (PTA-4) for the better ear was 62Db HL, and worse ear was 92Db HL. There was an improvement in speech recognition in the implanted ear as expected. All preoperative speech and language evaluations were conducted within 7 months of cochlear implantation. Twenty-three patients had at least 1 postoperative re-evaluation. Fourteen children had preoperative and postoperative assessments with the same tool, with 13 patients (93%) showing improvement in at least 1 domain. For patients with repeated assessment within 12 months of surgery, we observed an average improvement in standard scores of: GFTA-3 (+11.2), CELF-P2 Core Language (+10.3), CELF-5 Core Language (+7.0), ROWPVT (+2.8) and EOWPVT (+4.5). Individual results are described.

CONCLUSION

Improvement in speech and language measures can be demonstrated in children undergoing unilateral cochlear implantation for asymmetric sensorineural hearing losses. These children, who are not typical CI candidates, can benefit from a CI in the poorer ear.

Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf

When listening with a cochlear implant through one ear and acoustically through the other, binaural benefits and spatial hearing abilities are generally poorer than in other bilaterally stimulated configurations. With the working hypothesis that binaural neurons require interaurally matched inputs, we review causes for mismatch, their perceptual consequences, and experimental methods for mismatch measurements. The focus is on the three primary interaural dimensions of latency, frequency, and level. Often, the mismatch is not constant, but rather highly stimulus-dependent. We report on mismatch compensation strategies, taking into consideration the specific needs of the respective patient groups. Practical challenges typically faced by audiologists in the proposed fitting procedure are discussed. While improvement in certain areas (e.g., speaker localization) is definitely achievable, a more comprehensive mismatch compensation is a very ambitious endeavor. Even in the hypothetical ideal fitting case, performance is not expected to exceed that of a good bilateral cochlear implant user.

Audiological and subjective benefit with a new adhesive bone conduction hearing aid in children with congenital unilateral microtia and atresia

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the audiological benefits and subjective satisfaction in using a new adhesive bone conduction hearing aid in children with congenital unilateral microtia and atresia.

METHODS

We evaluated the effectiveness of the hearing aid using the sound field hearing threshold, speech recognition ability under quiet and noise, and subjective questionnaires in 13 children (5-15 years old).

RESULTS

The mean sound field hearing threshold significantly improved with a gain of 25.4 ± 4.9 dB HL. Mean word recognition scores were ameliorated in quiet and noise by 1.9 ± 2.5% and 7.3 ± 5.3%, respectively. Speech recognition ability results in noise varied; when the speech signal and noise were presented from the front, the mean speech recognition ability improved by 2.5 ± 1.6 dB signal-to-noise ratios (SNR). When noise was presented towards the normal hearing side, speech understanding was improved by 2.9 ± 1.6 dB SNR. When the speech signal was presented from the atretic side with noise from the normal hearing side, an improvement of 5.7 ± 3.4 dB SNR (p < 0.001) was noted. However, when noise was presented towards the newly aided atretic ear, no statistical significance was found. The questionnaire results indicated that the hearing device provided benefits in speech recognition ability in different complex situations, with high satisfaction rates.

CONCLUSION

The adhesive bone conduction hearing aid investigated here offers a concealed and aesthetic method to improve hearing in children with congenital unilateral microtia and atresia during their early years, with high subjective satisfaction.

Diagnostic Yield of Targeted Hearing Loss Gene Panel Sequencing in a Large German Cohort With a Balanced Age Distribution from a Single Diagnostic Center: An Eight-year Study

Objectives:

Hereditary hearing loss exhibits high degrees of genetic and clinical heterogeneity. To elucidate the population-specific and age-related genetic and clinical spectra of hereditary hearing loss, we investigated the sequencing data of causally associated hearing loss genes in a large cohort of hearing-impaired probands with a balanced age distribution from a single center in Southwest Germany.

Design:

Genetic testing was applied to 305 hearing-impaired probands/families with a suspected genetic hearing loss etiology and a balanced age distribution over a period of 8 years (2011–2018). These individuals were representative of the regional population according to age and sex distributions. The genetic testing workflow consisted of single-gene screening (n = 21) and custom-designed hearing loss gene panel sequencing (n = 284) targeting known nonsyndromic and syndromic hearing loss genes in a diagnostic setup. Retrospective reanalysis of sequencing data was conducted by applying the current American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology guidelines.

Results:

A genetic diagnosis was established for 75 (25%) of the probands that involved 75 causal variants in 35 genes, including 16 novel causal variants and 9 medically significant variant reclassifications. Nearly half of the solved cases (47%; n = 35) were related to variants in the five most frequently affected genes: GJB2 (25%), MYO15A, WFS1, SLC26A4, and COL11A1 (all 5%). Nearly one-quarter of the cases (23%; n = 17) were associated with variants in seven additional genes (TMPRSS3, COL4A3, LOXHD1, EDNRB, MYO6, TECTA, and USH2A). The remaining one-third of single cases (33%; n = 25) were linked to variants in 25 distinct genes. Diagnostic rates and gene distribution were highly dependent on phenotypic characteristics. A positive family history of autosomal-recessive inheritance in combination with early onset and higher grades of hearing loss significantly increased the solve rate up to 60%, while late onset and lower grades of hearing loss yielded significantly fewer diagnoses. Regarding genetic diagnoses, autosomal-dominant genes accounted for 37%, autosomal-recessive genes for 60%, and X-linked genes for 3% of the solved cases. Syndromic/nonsyndromic hearing loss mimic genes were affected in 27% of the genetic diagnoses.

Conclusions:

The genetic epidemiology of the largest German cohort subjected to comprehensive targeted sequencing for hereditary hearing loss to date revealed broad causal gene and variant spectra in this population. Targeted hearing loss gene panel analysis proved to be an effective tool for ensuring an appropriate diagnostic yield in a routine clinical setting including the identification of novel variants and medically significant reclassifications. Solve rates were highly sensitive to phenotypic characteristics. The unique population-adapted and balanced age distribution of the cohort favoring late hearing loss onset uncovered a markedly large contribution of autosomal-dominant genes to the diagnoses which may be a representative for other age balanced cohorts in other populations.

Rehabilitation for unilateral deafness - Narrative review comparing a novel bone conduction solution with existing options

Patients with single sided deafness (SSD) struggle with sound localization and speech in noise. Existing treatment options include contralateral routing of signal (CROS) systems, percutaneous bone conduction hearing devices (BCHDs), passive transcutaneous BCHDs, active BCHDs, and cochlear implants. Implanted devices provide benefits in speech in noise compared to CROS devices. Percutaneous BCHDs transmit sound efficiently but have aesthetic drawbacks and skin complications. Scalp attenuation impacts passive transcutaneous BCHD performance. Active BCHDs overcome these issues and provide benefits for speech in noise. Cochlear implantation is the only existing option that restores binaural input but introduces electrical rather than acoustic stimuli to the deaf ear. Active BCHDs have been designed to maintain efficient sound transmission and avoid chronic skin irritation and cosmetic concerns that may occur with percutaneous BCHDs. Cochlear implantation may be a superior option for recently deafened SSD patients, though this requires further study. The duration of deafness, patient age and comorbidities, and a shared decision-making model among patients, surgeons, and audiologists should be considered in device selection. The aim of this manuscript is to review available devices, discuss surgical considerations for implantable devices, review available published results for speech in noise and sound quality with each device, and provide an overview to guide shared decision making for patients and providers. This review consolidates available literature and reviews experience with a newer active transcutaneous active BCHD available for use in the SSD population.

Proficiency in Using Level Cue for Sound Localization Is Related to the Auditory Cortical Structure in Patients With Single-Sided Deafness

Spatial hearing, which largely relies on binaural time/level cues, is a challenge for patients with asymmetric hearing. The degree of the deficit is largely variable, and better sound localization performance is frequently reported. Studies on the compensatory mechanism revealed that monaural level cues and monoaural spectral cues contribute to variable behavior in those patients who lack binaural spatial cues. However, changes in the monaural level cues have not yet been separately investigated. In this study, the use of the level cue in sound localization was measured using stimuli of 1 kHz at a fixed level in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD), the most severe form of asymmetric hearing. The mean absolute error (MAE) was calculated and related to the duration/age onset of SSD. To elucidate the biological correlate of this variable behavior, sound localization ability was compared with the cortical volume of the parcellated auditory cortex. In both SSD patients (n = 26) and normal controls with one ear acutely plugged (n = 23), localization performance was best on the intact ear side; otherwise, there was wide interindividual variability. In the SSD group, the MAE on the intact ear side was worse than that of the acutely plugged controls, and it deteriorated with longer duration/younger age at SSD onset. On the impaired ear side, MAE improved with longer duration/younger age at SSD onset. Performance asymmetry across lateral hemifields decreased in the SSD group, and the maximum decrease was observed with the most extended duration/youngest age at SSD onset. The decreased functional asymmetry in patients with right SSD was related to greater cortical volumes in the right posterior superior temporal gyrus and the left planum temporale, which are typically involved in auditory spatial processing. The study results suggest that structural plasticity in the auditory cortex is related to behavioral changes in sound localization when utilizing monaural level cues in patients with SSD.