Short-term outcomes of cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness compared to bone conduction devices and contralateral routing of sound hearing aids-Results of a Randomised controlled trial (CINGLE-trial)

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.

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.

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.

Quality of Life With Cochlear Implantation Using the CIQOL-35 at a Tertiary Urban Medical Center: Our Experience

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes after cochlear implantation (CI) using the Cochlear Implant Quality of Life-35 questionnaire (CIQOL-35).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Single-institution tertiary care center.

PATIENTS

Patients 18 years and older who have undergone CI and CIQOL-35 survey.

INTERVENTIONS

Implementing CIQOL-35 from 2019 to 2022 to measure change in QOL after CI. Statistical analysis included nonparametric, univariate, and multivariate analyses. Significance was set at 0.05.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Differences in QOL among CI patients in each of the CIQOL-35 domains.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients (40 female, 53 male) aged 20 to 93 years (median 70 years) turned in 164 QOL surveys (68 preactivation, 96 postactivation). Postactivation median QOL was 5 to 15 points higher across all domains ( p < 0.001). QOL score distributions among unilateral CI only, bilateral CI, and unilateral CI with contralateral hearing aid users were not statistically different ( p > 0.05). Multivariate analysis identified that male sex ( β = -2.0; 95% confidence interval, -3.9 to -0.1) was a negative predictor for environment scores and not being married ( β = 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.02 to 4.0) was a positive predictor for entertainment scores. Median follow-up time was 13 months post-CI (interquartile range [IQR], 7.1-21.5 months).

CONCLUSIONS

CI patients experienced improved QOL postactivation among all QOL domains, whereas specific CI use pattern in regard to unilateral, bilateral, or bimodal did not affect QOL. Multivariate analysis identified marital status and sex as possible QOL predictors.

Long-Term Outcome of Cochlear Implantation in Children With Congenital, Perilingual, and Postlingual Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the long-term outcomes of children with single-sided deafness (SSD) after cochlear implant (CI) surgery, during and after rehabilitation, and compared the results of children with congenital, perilingual, and postlingual SSD. We evaluated the impact of SSD at age at onset and duration of deafness on their performance.

DESIGN

Thirty-six children with SSD treated with CI participated in the study: 20 had congenital, seven perilingual (defined: >0 to 4 years), and nine had postlingual deafness (defined as >4 years of age). Their outcome with CI were measured on both subjective and objective scales: duration of device use, speech intelligibility in noise and in quiet, bilateral hearing and localization ability, quality of life and hearing, presence and loudness of tinnitus, and hearing ability of the better hearing ear.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up time of 4.75 years, 32 of the 36 children used their CI on a regular basis. The remaining four children were nonusers. These children had congenital SSD and were older than three years at the time of CI surgery. Overall, for congenital/perilingual and postlingual SSD, speech intelligibility in noise and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) speech subscore were significantly improved, as were their subjective and objective localization ability and hearing-related quality of life. Children with postlingual SSD benefited from the CI with regard to speech intelligibility, SSQ speech/spatial/total score, and localization error, and children with congenital SSD showed better results with a short duration of deafness of less than 3 years compared with those with a longer deafness period.

CONCLUSIONS

Cochlear implantation is a successful treatment for children with congenital/perilingual or postlingual SSD. Results largely differed with respect to the onset and duration of deafness, and better outcomes were achieved by children with postlingual SSD and with a short duration of deafness. Our data also confirmed that children with congenital SSD should be implanted with a CI within three years of age.

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.

Implantable hearing devices in clinical practice. Systematic review and consensus statements

Objective

Implantable hearing devices represent a modern and innovative solution for hearing restoration. Over the years, these high-tech devices have increasingly evolved but their use in clinical practice is not universally agreed in the scientific literature. Congresses, meetings, conferences, and consensus statements to achieve international agreement have been made. This work follows this line and aims to answer unsolved questions regarding examinations, selection criteria and surgery for implantable hearing devices.

Materials and methods

A Consensus Working Group was established by the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology. A method group performed a systematic review for each single question to identify the current best evidence on the topic and to guide a multidisciplinary panel in developing the statements.

Results

Twenty-nine consensus statements were approved by the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology. These were associated with 4 key area subtopics regarding pre-operative tests, otological, audiological and surgical indications.

Conclusions

This consensus can be considered a further step forward to establish realistic guidelines on the debated topic of implantable hearing devices.

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.

Rau T. Pull-Out Strength of Orthodontic Miniscrews in the Temporal Bone

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive cochlear implant surgery by using a microstereotactic frame demands solid connection to the bone. We aimed to determine the stability of commercially available orthodontic miniscrews to evaluate their feasibility for frame's fixation. In addition, which substitute material most closely resembles the mechanical properties of the human temporal bone was evaluated.

METHODS

Pull-out tests were carried out with five different types of orthodontic miniscrews in human temporal bone specimens. Furthermore, short fiber filled epoxy (SFFE), solid rigid polyurethane (SRPU50), bovine femur, and porcine iliac bone were evaluated as substitute materials. In total, 57 tests in human specimens and 180 tests in the substitute materials were performed.

RESULTS

In human temporal bone, average pull-out forces ranged from 220 N to 285 N between screws. Joint stiffness in human temporal bone ranged between 14 N/mm and 358 N/mm. Statistically significant differences between the tested screws were measured in terms of stiffness and elastic energy. One screw type failed insertion due to tip breakage. No significant differences occurred between screws in maximum pull-out force. The average pull-out values of SFFE were 14.1 N higher compared to human specimen.

CONCLUSION

Orthodontic miniscrews provided rigid fixation when partially inserted in human temporal bone, as evidenced by pull-out forces and joint stiffness. Average values exceeded requirements despite variations between screws. Differences in stiffness and elastic energy indicate screw-specific interface mechanics. With proper insertion, orthodontic miniscrews appear suitable for microstereotactic frame anchoring during minimally invasive cochlear implant surgery. However, testing under more complex loading is needed to better predict clinical performance. For further pull-out tests, the most suitable substitute material is SFFE.

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.

Middle Ear Cholesteatoma and Vestibular Schwannoma Resection Followed by Cochlear Implant: Surgical Challenges and Audiological Outcomes

(1) Background: The occurrence of vestibular schwannoma (VS) associated with cholesteatoma is rare. A hearing impairment is one of the most significant issues in such cases. Moreover, the presence of middle and inner ear pathologies combined may represent a surgical challenge. No studies have described a combined surgical approach for these coexisting conditions (VS and cholesteatoma), nor the hearing rehabilitation outcomes of using cochlear implants for these patients. (2) Case Report: This paper is on a female patient who underwent simultaneous surgical treatments for VS and middle ear cholesteatoma in the right ear followed by a cochlear implant, describing the technique and the audiological results. (3) Conclusions: The surgical approach was successful and enabled the resection of lesions with the auditory nerve and cochlea preservation. Cochlear implantation in the right ear showed positive postoperative results, with an improvement in the results with the CI in silent and noisy environments.

Quality of Life and Audiological Benefits in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users in Romania: Systematic Review and Cohort Study

Profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) can be successfully treated with a cochlear implant (CI), and treatment is usually accompanied by increased quality of life (QoL). Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate generic and health-related QoL, as well as the level of audiological outcomes, of CI users, in addition to whether Qol can be restored to the extent of those with normal hearing. Furthermore, different implantation timepoints were compared (early vs. late), and a possible correlation between health and generic QoL questionnaires was investigated. The outcomes from 93 pediatric CI users from Romania were analyzed in the study. Two QoL questionnaires (SSQ12, AQoL-6D), as well as the HSM sentence test and Soundfield measurements, were assessed. The outcomes revealed that the CI users were able to achieve the same QoL as their age- and-gender matched peers with normal hearing, and hearing was restored with good speech comprehension. No significant difference between early- and late-implanted children was detected, although a tendency of a better Word Recognition Score (+10%) in the early-implanted group was discovered. A moderate and significant correlation between the generic and health-related Qol questionnaire was observed. Audiological examinations are still the standard practice by which to measure the benefit of any hearing intervention; nonetheless, generic and health-related QoL should be assessed in order to provide a full picture of a successful and patient-satisfactory cochlear implant procedure.

[Intervention effects of bone conduction hearing aids in patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss]

The incidence of single-sided deafness（SSD） is increasing year by year. Due to the hearing defects of one ear, the ability of sound localization, speech recognition in noise, and quality of life of patients with single-sided deafness will be affected to varying degrees. This article reviews the intervention effects of different types of bone conduction hearing aids in patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss, and the differences of intervention effects between bone conduction hearing aids, contralateral routing of signal（CROS） aids, and cochlea implant（CI）, to provide a reference for the auditory intervention and clinical treatment of single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss.

QoL, CIs, QALYs, and Individualized Rehabilitation: The Clinical and Practical Benefits of Regularly Assessing the Quality of Life of Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients

This study aimed to report quality of life (QoL) scores in unilateral cochlear implant (CI) users and to generate guidance for clinicians on using QoL measures to individualize CI counselling and rehabilitation and to increase access to CIs as a mode of rehabilitation. Participants (n = 101) were unilateral CI users with single-sided deafness (SSD; n = 17), asymmetrical hearing loss (AHL; n = 26), or bilateral hearing loss (Uni; n = 58). Generic QoL was assessed via the Health Utilities Index (HUI-3), and disease-specific QoL was assessed via the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12) and Nijmegen CI Questionnaire (NCIQ) at preimplantation and at 6 and 12 months of CI use. All groups had significantly increased HUI-3 scores at both intervals. The SSD group showed significant benefit on the SSQ12 at visit 3, the AHL group showed significant benefit on the SSQ12 and most NCIQ subdomains at both intervals, and the Uni group showed significant benefit with both tests at both intervals. Unilateral CI recipients demonstrate improved QoL within the first 12 months of device use. Regular assessment with generic and disease-specific questionnaires has the potential to play an important role in personalizing treatment and possibly in increasing access to CI provision.

Health Insurance Coverage of Cochlear Implantation in Single-Sided Deafness and Asymmetric Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing interest in providing cochlear implants (CIs) in single-sided deafness (SSD) or asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). CI clinics have experienced a range of outcomes when seeking insurance coverage for patients. The study explored the extent to which CI clinics were able to secure insurance coverage and whether there were differences in successfully gaining such coverage.

STUDY DESIGN

A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was used to collect data from US CI clinicians. Respondents were from all regions of the United States and represented a diversity of clinic types including hospitals, university-based clinics, private clinics, and schools. Data were collected during August-October 2021 from 105 respondents regarding their clinic's experience in gaining health insurance coverage for pediatric and adult patients who had SSD or AHL. Strategies that had been used for gaining coverage after an initial denial were explored. Interviews were conducted with some respondents to gain additional insights beyond the survey.

RESULTS

There was a substantial increase in the number of SSD operations conducted after 2019, the year when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) manufacturer criteria expanded to include CI in SSD and AHL. Respondents were grouped into four categories based on volume of SSD operations before 2019 (≤10, 11-29, 30-49, and ≥50). The number of SSD operations after 2019 went up in all categories except for the 10 or less category, which declined by 43%. A minority of respondents indicated that they were able to obtain SSD insurance coverage infrequently (5%) or almost never (8%). Peer-to-peer review was the most successful approach to overturning an initial denial. Many clinics note that they are nearly always declined for SSD coverage on the first submission and must appeal.

CONCLUSIONS

There is variability in CI coverage for SSD and AHL. Some health insurance coverage is available for patients of all ages, although some clinics note more difficulty gaining coverage for children younger than 5 years because of the FDA criteria. Clinicians are most successful at gaining coverage after an initial denial with peer-to-peer review, although the process is time-consuming and delays surgery. Efforts to expand access to CIs in SSD for children and adults who may benefit might best be addressed by reflecting on what was done to expand insurance coverage in bilateral deafness-a process that depended on relevant clinical research; research presented to the FDA for guidelines change; information sharing with the general public and constituencies in the hearing loss field including professionals, parent, and consumer organizations; and ongoing advocacy for change with insurers. To date, outcomes research in young children with CI in SSD is limited. Until such research is conducted and published, insurers will continue to argue that other rehabilitative options are approved and available.

Speech Perception in Noise and Sound Localization for Cochlear Implant With Single-Sided Deafness Compared With Contralateral Routing of Signal Hearing Aids

OBJECTIVE

Cochlear implantation (CI) for the treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD) is a relatively new treatment modality. Although comparing the effectiveness of CI and contralateral routing of signal (CROS) hearing aids (HAs) is important, very few reports on this topic exist. In this study, objective assessments and subjective assessments were conducted to determine which SSD individuals would prefer CI or CROS HAs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Objective assessments (speech perception and sound localization) and subjective assessments (Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA), Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), MOS Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2)) were performed on 87 SSD patients. Of the 87 SSD patients, 33 patients hoped for CROS HAs, and 17 patients hoped for CI. The CI group underwent subjective and objective assessments at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The CROS HAs group underwent objective assessments at 1 month after wearing CROS HAs.

RESULTS

After the intervention, the localization ability was significantly improved in the CI group (p < 0.05) with no significant improvement in that of the CROS HAs group (p = 0.48). No significant improvement in speech perception in noise was observed in the CROS (Signal-to-Noise ratio + 10, p = 0.08; SN + 0, p = 0.17); however, a significant improvement in the CI group was observed at 12 months postoperatively. The APHAB subscale "background noise" and SF-36v2 health concepts of role-physical, general health, vitality, role-emotional, and mental health were significantly higher in the CI group.

CONCLUSION

CI was superior to CROS HAs in speech perception in terms of noise and sound localization. Patients with postlingual acute-onset hearing loss and more handicaps and a more positive view of their hearing loss possibly tend to choose CI.

Twelve-Month Outcomes of Simultaneous Translabyrinthine Resection and Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

Audiometric outcomes at 12 months following simultaneous translabyrinthine (TL) resection of vestibular schwannoma (VS) and cochlear implantation (CI).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing TL resection of sporadic, unilateral VS ≤ 2 cm were prospectively enrolled. Preoperative testing included binaural AZBio in noise and quiet and unilateral Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC). Tinnitus Handicap Index (THI) and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaires were also completed. Patients underwent TL resection with simultaneous CI. The preoperative test battery was repeated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after activation. Statistical analysis was performed to characterize short-term outcomes (preoperative to 3 months), longer-term outcomes (3-12 months), and overall changes during the preoperative to 12-month period.

RESULTS

AZBio, CNC, and THI improved at 3 months with no significant changes thereafter and showed durable improvement at 12 months compared to preoperative testing. While SSQ did not improve at 12 months, a subset of patients showed either recovery or improvement of SSQ-spatial subscores. Patients with cerebellopontine angle tumors had poorer performance, although the impact of tumor size and location could not be deduced based on the small sample size.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing simultaneous CI and TL resection of VS had durable improvements in speech perception and tinnitus severity 12 months following surgery. Subjective improvements in localization were not observed. Additional studies are needed to determine which VS patients are optimal candidates for CI.

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.

Treated large posterior fossa vestibular schwannoma and meningioma: Hearing outcome and willingness-to-accept brain implant for unilateral deafness

Background/Objective

To compare functional hearing and tinnitus outcomes in treated large (~ 3 cm) vestibular schwannoma (VS) and posterior fossa meningioma cohorts, and construct willingness-to-accept profiles for an experimental brain implant to treat unilateral hearing loss.

Methods

A two-way MANOVA model with two independent variables (tumor type; time from treatment) and three dependent variables (hearing effort of tumor ear; abbreviated Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12); Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI)) was used to analyze data from VS (N = 32) and meningioma (N = 50) patients who were treated at a tertiary care center between 2010 and 2020. A query to probe acceptance of experimental treatment for hearing loss relative to expected benefit was used to construct willingness-to-accept profiles.

Results

Tumor type was statistically significant on the combined dependent variables analysis (F[3, 76] = 19.172, p < .0005, Wilks' Λ = 0.569). Meningioma showed better outcome for hearing effort (F[1, 76] = 14.632, p < .0005) and SSQ12 (F[1, 76] = 16.164, p < .0005), but not for TFI (F[1, 76] = 1.247, p = .268) on univariate two-way ANOVA analyses. Superior hearing effort and SSQ12 indices in the short-term (< 2 years) persisted in the long-term (> 2 years) (p ≤ .017). At the 60% speech understanding level, 77% of respondents would accept an experimental brain implant.

Conclusion

Hearing outcome is better for posterior fossa meningioma compared to VS. Most patients with hearing loss in the tumor ear would consider a brain implant if the benefit level would be comparable to a cochlear implant.

Level of Evidence

2.

The Acoustic Change Complex Compared to Hearing Performance in Unilaterally and Bilaterally Deaf Cochlear Implant Users

OBJECTIVES

Clinical measures evaluating hearing performance in cochlear implant (CI) users depend on attention and linguistic skills, which limits the evaluation of auditory perception in some patients. The acoustic change complex (ACC), a cortical auditory evoked potential to a sound change, might yield useful objective measures to assess hearing performance and could provide insight in cortical auditory processing. The aim of this study is to examine the ACC in response to frequency changes as an objective measure for hearing performance in CI users.

DESIGN

Thirteen bilaterally deaf and six single-sided deaf subjects were included, all having used a unilateral CI for at least 1 year. Speech perception was tested with a consonant-vowel-consonant test (+10 dB signal-to-noise ratio) and a digits-in-noise test. Frequency discrimination thresholds were measured at two reference frequencies, using a 3-interval, 2-alternative forced-choice, adaptive staircase procedure. The two reference frequencies were selected using each participant's frequency allocation table and were centered in the frequency band of an electrode that included 500 or 2000 Hz, corresponding to the apical electrode or the middle electrode, respectively. The ACC was evoked with pure tones of the same two reference frequencies with varying frequency increases: within the frequency band of the middle or the apical electrode (+0.25 electrode step), and steps to the center frequency of the first (+1), second (+2), and third (+3) adjacent electrodes.

RESULTS

Reproducible ACCs were recorded in 17 out of 19 subjects. Most successful recordings were obtained with the largest frequency change (+3 electrode step). Larger frequency changes resulted in shorter N1 latencies and larger N1-P2 amplitudes. In both unilaterally and bilaterally deaf subjects, the N1 latency and N1-P2 amplitude of the CI ears correlated to speech perception as well as frequency discrimination, that is, short latencies and large amplitudes were indicative of better speech perception and better frequency discrimination. No significant differences in ACC latencies or amplitudes were found between the CI ears of the unilaterally and bilaterally deaf subjects, but the CI ears of the unilaterally deaf subjects showed substantially longer latencies and smaller amplitudes than their contralateral normal-hearing ears.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACC latency and amplitude evoked by tone frequency changes correlate well to frequency discrimination and speech perception capabilities of CI users. For patients unable to reliably perform behavioral tasks, the ACC could be of added value in assessing hearing performance.

Short- and Long-Term Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Disabling Tinnitus in Single-Sided Deafness Patients: A Systematic Review

Patients with single-sided deafness can experience an ipsilateral disabling tinnitus that has a major impact on individuals’ social communication and quality of life. Cochlear implants appear to be superior to conventional treatments to alleviate tinnitus in single-sided deafness. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of cochlear implants in single-sided deafness with disabling tinnitus when conventional treatments fail to alleviate tinnitus (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022353292). All published studies in PubMed/MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases until December 2021 were included. A total of 474 records were retrieved, 31 studies were included and were divided into two categories according to whether tinnitus was assessed as a primary complaint or not. In all studies, cochlear implantation, evaluated using subjective validated tools, succeeded in reducing tinnitus significantly. Objective evaluation tools were less likely to be used but showed similar results. A short-(3 months) and long-(up to 72 months) term tinnitus suppression was reported. When the cochlear implant is disactivated, complete residual tinnitus inhibition was reported to persist up to 24 h. The results followed a similar pattern in studies where tinnitus was assesed as a primary complaint or not. In conclusion, the present review confirmed the effectiveness of cochlear implantation in sustainably reducing disabling tinnitus in single-sided deafness patients.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

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.

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.