1
|
Lindquist NR, Holder JT, Patro A, Cass ND, Tawfik KO, O'Malley MR, Bennett ML, Haynes DS, Gifford RH, Perkins EL. Cochlear Implants for Single-Sided Deafness: Quality of Life, Daily Usage, and Duration of Deafness. Laryngoscope 2023; 133:2362-2370. [PMID: 36254870 DOI: 10.1002/lary.30452] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2022] [Revised: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 09/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathan R Lindquist
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Jourdan T Holder
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
- Department of Hearing and Speech Science, Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Ankita Patro
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Nathan D Cass
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Kareem O Tawfik
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Matthew R O'Malley
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Marc L Bennett
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - David S Haynes
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - René H Gifford
- Department of Hearing and Speech Science, Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Elizabeth L Perkins
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chau IY, Li SYH, Shiao AS, Islam AS, Coelho DH. Early effects of very early cochlear implant activation on tinnitus. J Chin Med Assoc 2023; 86:850-853. [PMID: 37481759 DOI: 10.1097/jcma.0000000000000968] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cochlear implantation (CI) has long been the standard of care for patients with severe-to-profound hearing impairment. Yet the benefits of CI extend far beyond speech understanding, with mounting recent literature supporting its role in tinnitus abatement. However, those studies have uniformly analyzed the effects of tinnitus after the traditional 3-4 weeks waiting period between CI surgery and device activation. As many clinics are shifting these waiting intervals to become shorter (in some cases within 24 hours, little is known about tinnitus abatement very early in the postoperative period. The aim of this study was to compare preoperative and postoperative tinnitus handicaps in this unique but growing population of very early-activated patients. METHODS Twenty-seven adults with severe-to-profound hearing impairment with chronic tinnitus (>6 months) were included. Patients with concomitant psychiatric disorders were excluded. All patients were implanted with the same array and were switched on within 24 hours after the surgery. Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) was recorded preoperatively, immediately after activation at 24 hours postoperatively, at 1 week, 2 weeks, and I month after activation. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare values between preoperative assessment and respective fitting sessions. RESULTS Mean THI 24 hours after implantation increased in comparison to that assessed preoperatively (77.6 vs 72.5, p = 0.001). By 1 week after surgery, the THI had decreased to 54.9 ( p < 0.001). This trend continued and was statistically significant at 2 weeks (36.0, p < 0.001) and 1 month (28.5, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION On average, most patients with tinnitus will note a significant improvement in their tinnitus handicap when activated within 24 hours of CI. However, tinnitus does increase between surgery and 24 hours, most likely reflecting not only intracochlear changes, but modulation of the entire auditory pathway. Following this early rise, the tinnitus continues to abate over the following month. Patients with tinnitus may benefit from early activation, although should be counseled that they may experience an exacerbation during the very early postoperative period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ivy Yenwen Chau
- Department of Otolaryngology, Cheng Hsin General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
- Faculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | | | - An-Suey Shiao
- Department of Otolaryngology, Cheng Hsin General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
- Faculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Albina S Islam
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia, USA
| | - Daniel H Coelho
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Daher GS, Kocharyan A, Dillon MT, Carlson ML. Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in Adults With Single-Sided Deafness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2023; 44:297-309. [PMID: 36791341 DOI: 10.1097/mao.0000000000003833] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/17/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess spatial hearing, tinnitus, and quality-of-life outcomes in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) who underwent cochlear implantation. DATABASES REVIEWED PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched from January 2008 to September 2021 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. METHODS Studies reporting spatial hearing, tinnitus, and quality-of-life outcomes in adult cochlear implant (CI) recipients (≥18 yr old) with SSD were evaluated. Study characteristics, demographic data, spatial hearing (speech recognition in noise, sound source localization), tinnitus (severity, loudness), and quality-of-life outcomes were collected. RESULTS From an initial search of 1,147 articles, 36 studies that evaluated CI use in 796 unique adults with SSD (51.3 ± 12.4 yr of age at time of implantation) were included. The mean duration of deafness was 6.2 ± 9.6 years. There was evidence of improvement for speech recognition in noise using different target-to-masker spatial configurations, with the largest benefit observed for target-to-masker configurations assessing head shadow (mean, 1.87-6.2 dB signal-to-noise ratio). Sound source localization, quantified as root-mean-squared error, improved with CI use (mean difference [MD], -25.3 degrees; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -35.9 to -14.6 degrees; p < 0.001). Also, CI users reported a significant reduction in tinnitus severity as measured with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (MD, -29.97; 95% CI, -43.9 to -16.1; p < 0.001) and an improvement in spatial hearing abilities as measured with the Spatial, Speech, and Qualities of Hearing questionnaire (MD, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.7 to 2.8; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Cochlear implantation and CI use consistently offer improvements in speech recognition in noise, sound source localization, tinnitus, and perceived quality of life in adults with SSD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ghazal S Daher
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Armine Kocharyan
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Margaret T Dillon
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Matthew L Carlson
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Idriss SA, Reynard P, Marx M, Mainguy A, Joly CA, Ionescu EC, Assouly KKS, Thai-Van H. Short- and Long-Term Effect of Cochlear Implantation on Disabling Tinnitus in Single-Sided Deafness Patients: A Systematic Review. J Clin Med 2022; 11:5664. [PMID: 36233532 PMCID: PMC9572534 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11195664] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2022] [Revised: 09/12/2022] [Accepted: 09/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samar A. Idriss
- Department of Audiology and Otoneurological Evaluation, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69002 Lyon, France
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Eye and Ear University Hospital, Holy Spirit University of Kaslik, Beirut 1202, Lebanon
| | - Pierre Reynard
- Department of Audiology and Otoneurological Evaluation, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69002 Lyon, France
- Institut de l’Audition, Institut Pasteur, University of Paris, INSERM, 75012 Paris, France
- Faculty of Medicine, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
| | - Mathieu Marx
- Department of Otology, Otoneurology and Pediatric Otolaryngology, Pierre-Paul Riquet Hospital, Toulouse Purpan University Hospital, 31300 Toulouse, France
- Brain and Cognition Laboratory, UMR 5549, Toulouse III University, 31062 Toulouse, France
| | - Albane Mainguy
- National Commission for the Evaluation of Medical Devices and Health Technologies, Haute Autorité de Santé, 93210 La Plaine St Denis, France
| | - Charles-Alexandre Joly
- Department of Audiology and Otoneurological Evaluation, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69002 Lyon, France
- Institut de l’Audition, Institut Pasteur, University of Paris, INSERM, 75012 Paris, France
- Faculty of Medicine, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
| | - Eugen Constant Ionescu
- Department of Audiology and Otoneurological Evaluation, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69002 Lyon, France
- Institut de l’Audition, Institut Pasteur, University of Paris, INSERM, 75012 Paris, France
| | - Kelly K. S. Assouly
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
- UMC Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Cochlear Technology Centre, 2800 Mechelen, Belgium
| | - Hung Thai-Van
- Department of Audiology and Otoneurological Evaluation, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Hospices Civils de Lyon, 69002 Lyon, France
- Institut de l’Audition, Institut Pasteur, University of Paris, INSERM, 75012 Paris, France
- Faculty of Medicine, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
- National Commission for the Evaluation of Medical Devices and Health Technologies, Haute Autorité de Santé, 93210 La Plaine St Denis, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Assouly KKS, Arts RAGJ, Graham PL, van Dijk B, James CJ. Influence of tinnitus annoyance on hearing-related quality of life in cochlear implant recipients. Sci Rep 2022; 12:14423. [PMID: 36002556 PMCID: PMC9402917 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-18823-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Accepted: 08/19/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Tinnitus is a common symptom in cochlear implant (CI) recipients. There is no clear evidence of the influence of tinnitus on hearing-related quality of life (QoL) in this population. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between hearing-related QoL measured by the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12) and tinnitus annoyance or perceived change in tinnitus annoyance after cochlear implantation. The study sample consisted of 2322 implanted adults across France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Information relating to QoL measured using the SSQ12 and tinnitus annoyance and change in tinnitus annoyance, assessed using single-item questions, were collected one or more years post-implantation. The relationship between SSQ12 score and tinnitus annoyance or change in tinnitus annoyance was analysed using linear models adjusted for age and unilateral versus bilateral implants. Tukey pairwise tests were used to compare mean SSQ12 scores across levels of tinnitus annoyance and changes. Tinnitus prevalence was 33.9% post-implantation. Recipients with tinnitus had a significantly lower SSQ12 score than recipients without tinnitus. SSQ scores varied significantly with tinnitus annoyance, age and unilateral versus bilateral implants. Overall, CI recipients who experienced less bothersome tinnitus reported better hearing-related QoL. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the influence of tinnitus on CI recipients' hearing to manage patient expectations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly K S Assouly
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- Cochlear Technology Centre Belgium, Mechelen, Belgium.
| | | | - Petra L Graham
- School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, Australia
| | - Bas van Dijk
- Cochlear Technology Centre Belgium, Mechelen, Belgium
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
American Cochlear Implant Alliance Task Force Guidelines for Clinical Assessment and Management of Adult Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness. Ear Hear 2022; 43:1605-1619. [PMID: 35994570 PMCID: PMC9592177 DOI: 10.1097/aud.0000000000001260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
Holder JT, Holcomb MA, Snapp H, Labadie RF, Vroegop J, Rocca C, Elgandy MS, Dunn C, Gifford RH. Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults Using Bimodal Hearing Configurations. OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY OPEN 2022; 2:e011. [PMID: 36274668 PMCID: PMC9581116 DOI: 10.1097/ono.0000000000000011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Clinics are treating a growing number of patients with greater amounts of residual hearing. These patients often benefit from a bimodal hearing configuration in which acoustic input from a hearing aid on 1 ear is combined with electrical stimulation from a cochlear implant on the other ear. The current guidelines aim to review the literature and provide best practice recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of individuals with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who may benefit from bimodal hearing configurations. Specifically, the guidelines review: benefits of bimodal listening, preoperative and postoperative cochlear implant evaluation and programming, bimodal hearing aid fitting, contralateral routing of signal considerations, bimodal treatment for tinnitus, and aural rehabilitation recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Christine Rocca
- Guy’s and St. Thomas’ Hearing Implant Centre, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Assouly K, Smit AL, Stegeman I, Rhebergen KS, van Dijk B, Stokroos R. Cochlear implantation for tinnitus in adults with bilateral hearing loss: protocol of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e043288. [PMID: 34006544 PMCID: PMC8130732 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043288] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2020] [Revised: 03/25/2021] [Accepted: 04/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Tinnitus is the perception of sound without an external stimulus, often experienced as a ringing or buzzing sound. Subjective tinnitus is assumed to origin from changes in neural activity caused by reduced or lack of auditory input, for instance due to hearing loss. Since auditory deprivation is thought to be one of the causes of tinnitus, increasing the auditory input by cochlear implantation might be a possible treatment. In studies assessing cochlear implantation for patients with hearing loss, tinnitus relief was seen as a secondary outcome. Therefore, we will assess the effect of cochlear implantation in patients with primarily tinnitus complaints. METHOD AND ANALYSIS In this randomised controlled trial starting in January 2021 at the ENT department of the UMC Utrecht (the Netherlands), patients with a primary complaint of tinnitus will be included. Fifty patients (Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) >32, Beck's Depression Index <19, pure tone average at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz: bilateral threshold between 50 and ≤75 dB) will be randomised towards cochlear implantation or no intervention. Primary outcome of the study is tinnitus burden as measured by the TFI. Outcomes of interest are tinnitus severity, hearing performances (tinnitus pitch and loudness, speech perception), quality of life, depression and patient-related changes. Outcomes will be evaluated prior to implantation and at 3 and 6 months after the surgery. The control group will receive questionnaires at 3 and 6 months after randomisation. We expect a significant difference between the cochlear implant recipients and the control group for tinnitus burden. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This research protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Center (UMC) Utrecht (NL70319.041.19, V5.0, January 2021). The trial results will be made accessible to the public in a peer-review journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Trial registration number NL8693; Pre-results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly Assouly
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Cochlear Technology Centre, Mechelen, Belgium
| | - Adriana L Smit
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Stegeman
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Koenraad S Rhebergen
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Robert Stokroos
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Katiri R, Hall DA, Killan CF, Smith S, Prayuenyong P, Kitterick PT. Systematic review of outcome domains and instruments used in designs of clinical trials for interventions that seek to restore bilateral and binaural hearing in adults with unilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss ('single-sided deafness'). Trials 2021; 22:220. [PMID: 33743802 PMCID: PMC7981927 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05160-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2020] [Accepted: 02/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This systematic review aimed to identify, compare and contrast outcome domains and outcome instruments reported in studies investigating interventions that seek to restore bilateral (two-sided) and/or binaural (both ears) hearing in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD). Findings can inform the development of evidence-based guidance to facilitate design decisions for confirmatory trials. METHODS Records were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP and the NIHR UK clinical trials gateway. The search included records published from 1946 to March 2020. Included studies were those as follows: (a) recruiting adults aged 18 years or older diagnosed with SSD of average threshold severity worse than 70 dB HL in the worse-hearing ear and normal (or near-normal) hearing in the better-hearing ear, (b) evaluating interventions to restore bilateral and/or binaural hearing and (c) enrolling those adults in a controlled trial, before-and-after study or cross-over study. Studies that fell just short of the participant eligibility criteria were included in a separate sensitivity analysis. RESULTS Ninety-six studies were included (72 full inclusion, 24 sensitivity analysis). For fully included studies, 37 exclusively evaluated interventions to re-establish bilateral hearing and 29 exclusively evaluated interventions to restore binaural hearing. Overall, 520 outcome domains were identified (350 primary and 170 secondary). Speech-related outcome domains were the most common (74% of studies), followed by spatial-related domains (60% of studies). A total of 344 unique outcome instruments were reported. Speech-related outcome domains were measured by 73 different instruments and spatial-related domains by 43 different instruments. There was considerable variability in duration of follow-up, ranging from acute (baseline) testing to 10 years after the intervention. The sensitivity analysis identified no additional outcome domains. CONCLUSIONS This review identified large variability in the reporting of outcome domains and instruments in studies evaluating the therapeutic benefits and harms of SSD interventions. Reports frequently omitted information on what domains the study intended to assess, and on what instruments were used to measure which domains. TRIAL REGISTRATION The systematic review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): Registration Number CRD42018084274 . Registered on 13 March 2018, last revised on 7th of May 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roulla Katiri
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Ropewalk House, 113 The Ropewalk, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
- Department of Audiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, D07 R2WY Ireland
- Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
| | - Deborah A. Hall
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Ropewalk House, 113 The Ropewalk, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
- Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
- University of Nottingham Malaysia, Jalan Broga, 43500 Semenyih, Selangor Darul Ehsan Malaysia
| | - Catherine F. Killan
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Ropewalk House, 113 The Ropewalk, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
- Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
- Yorkshire Auditory Implant Service, Bradford Teaching Hospitals Foundation NHS Trust, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Duckworth Lane, Bradford, BD9 6RJ UK
| | - Sandra Smith
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Ropewalk House, 113 The Ropewalk, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
- Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
| | - Pattarawadee Prayuenyong
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Ropewalk House, 113 The Ropewalk, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
- Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand
| | - Pádraig T. Kitterick
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), Ropewalk House, 113 The Ropewalk, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
- Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queen’s Medical Centre, Derby Road, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Assouly KKS, van Heteren JAA, Stokroos RJ, Stegeman I, Smit AL. Cochlear implantation for patients with tinnitus - A systematic review. PROGRESS IN BRAIN RESEARCH 2020; 260:27-50. [PMID: 33637223 DOI: 10.1016/bs.pbr.2020.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cochlear implantation (CI) is used in patients with severe-to-profound hearing loss when hearing aids provide limited or no benefit for speech perception. Studies on this topic reported tinnitus reduction as a common side effect of the electrical activation after cochlear implantation. So far, it is unclear what the effect is when patients do receive their implant primarily because of tinnitus complaints. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of the electrical stimulation with a cochlear implant in patients with tinnitus as a primary complaint, by systematically reviewing the literature. METHODS Two independent authors identified studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Original studies reporting outcomes of electrical stimulation by cochlear implantation for primarily tinnitus (defined as severe or incapacitating distress levels) were included, if they reported a follow-up of at least three months. The pre- and post-implantation tinnitus distress scores on single and/or multi-item questionnaires of the included studies were extracted. RESULTS In total, 4091 unique articles were retrieved. After screening titles, abstracts and full texts, we included seven prospective cohort studies (105 subjects in total, range: 10-26). All studies had considerable risks of bias. All tinnitus patients in the included studies had asymmetrical hearing loss or single-sided deafness. A statistically significant tinnitus distress improvement based on tinnitus questionnaire scores was found in every study. CONCLUSION Our systematic review reveals that electrical stimulation by cochlear implants in patients with a primary complaint of tinnitus has a positive impact on tinnitus distress. Nevertheless, only small sample sizes were found and studies showed considerable risks of bias.a.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly K S Assouly
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical and Experimental Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Cochlear Technology Center, Mechelen, Belgium.
| | - Jan A A van Heteren
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical and Experimental Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Robert J Stokroos
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical and Experimental Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Inge Stegeman
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical and Experimental Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Adriana L Smit
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical and Experimental Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht Brain Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Cochlear Implantation for Treatment of Tinnitus in Single-sided Deafness: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41:e1004-e1012. [DOI: 10.1097/mao.0000000000002711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
|
12
|
Peter N, Liyanage N, Pfiffner F, Huber A, Kleinjung T. The Influence of Cochlear Implantation on Tinnitus in Patients with Single-Sided Deafness: A Systematic Review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019; 161:576-588. [DOI: 10.1177/0194599819846084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
ObjectivesThis systematic review provides an overview of the available studies (published by January 29, 2018) with descriptive data analysis about the influence of cochlear implantation on tinnitus in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD).Data SourcesPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar.Review MethodsOriginal studies about the influence of cochlear implantation on tinnitus, measured with different tinnitus questionnaires or visual analog scale, in patients with SSD were included. The pre- and postimplantation tinnitus scores of the included studies were extracted for the further systematic review.ResultsThe systematic search yielded 1028 studies. After evaluating titles, abstracts, and full texts, 1011 of these were dismissed. From the remaining 17 studies, 4 showed a low directness of evidence or high risk of bias and were therefore excluded. Due to the nature of cochlear implantation in SSD, only cohort studies and no randomized trials exist, which limits the evaluation in a systematic review. Generally, the mean tinnitus questionnaire scores decreased after cochlear implantation in these 13 studies with a total of 153 patients. The most widely used tinnitus questionnaire was the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. In these studies, 34.2% of patients demonstrated complete suppression, 53.7% an improvement, 7.3% a stable value, and 4.9% an increase of tinnitus, and none of the patients reported an induction of tinnitus.ConclusionThis review shows a clear improvement of tinnitus complaints after cochlear implantation in patients with SSD. Therefore, tinnitus might be considered as an additional indication for cochlear implantation in SSD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Peter
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Nuwan Liyanage
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Flurin Pfiffner
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Alexander Huber
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Tobias Kleinjung
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|