Search

Objectives: Single-sided deafness (SSD) can have consequences for a child's language, educational, and social development. A cochlear implant (CI) is the only device which can restore true binaural hearing, yet they are only approved for children with (SSD) over the age of five in the United States. Reports on speech perception outcomes for children implanted at a younger age are limited. The present study aims to examine the effects of age at implantation, duration of deafness, hearing loss etiology, and presence of additional disabilities on device usage and speech perception outcomes., Methods: A retrospective chart review was used to examine demographics and speech perception outcomes for 18 children implanted at age five or younger., Results: Speech perception results were highly variable, with some children deriving significant benefit and others demonstrating no sound awareness through the implant alone. Age at implantation and duration of deafness did not have a clear impact on outcomes. Device usage was low in many children, often those with anatomical abnormalities such as a hypoplastic cochlear nerve. There are challenges to assessing speech perception in young children with SSD, leading to a lack of standardized outcome measures., Conclusions: Early CI for children with SSD may improve speech perception, but benefit is not guaranteed. Candidacy evaluation should consider both medical and audiological factors, in addition to the degree of family support and realistic expectations. Caution is especially warranted in children with significant anatomical anomalies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. J. Thomas Roland Jr. is a consultant for Cochlear Americas. Dr. Roland and Dr. Emily Spitzer have received research funding from Cochlear Americas for cochlear implant-related projects which are not affiliated with this research., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of ceiling effects for commonly used speech perception tests in a large population of children who received a cochlear implant (CI) before the age of four. A secondary goal was to determine the demographic factors that were relevant for predicting which children were more likely to reach ceiling level performance. We hypothesize that ceiling effects are highly prevalent for most tests., Design: Retrospective chart review of children receiving a CI between 2002 and 2014., Results: 165 children were included. Median scores were above ceiling levels (≥90% correct) for the majority of speech perception tests and all distributions of scores were highly skewed. Children who were implanted earlier, received two implants, and were oral communicators were more likely to reach ceiling-level performance. Age and years of CI listening experience at time of test were negatively correlated with performance, suggesting a non-random assignment of tests. Many children were re-tested on tests for which they had already scored at ceiling., Conclusions: Commonly used speech perception tests for children with CIs are prone to ceiling effects and may not accurately reflect how a child performs in everyday listening situations.

Introduction: Cochlear implants (CIs) provide access to sound for children and adults who do not receive adequate benefit from hearing aids. Age at implantation is known to affect outcomes across the lifespan., Areas Covered: The effects of age on CI outcomes are examined for infants, children, adolescents, and older adults. A variety of outcome measures are considered, including speech perception, language, cognition, and quality of life measures., Expert Opinion/commentary: For those meeting candidacy criteria, CIs are beneficial at any age. In general, younger age is related to greater benefit when considering pre-lingual deafness. Other factors such as additional disabilities, may mitigate this effect. Post-lingually deafened adults demonstrate similar benefit regardless of age, though the oldest individuals (80+) may see smaller degrees of improvement from preoperative scores. Benefit can be measured in many ways, and the areas of greatest benefit may vary based on age: young children appear to see the greatest effects of age at implantation on language measures, whereas scores on cognitive measures appear to be most impacted for the oldest population. Future research should consider implantation at extreme ages (5-9 months or > 90 years), unconventional measures of CI benefit including qualitative assessments, and longitudinal designs.

Objective: Children with high-frequency severe-to-profound hearing loss and low-frequency residual hearing who do not derive significant benefit from hearing aids are now being considered for cochlear implantation. Previous research shows that hearing preservation is possible and may be desirable for the use of electroacoustic stimulation (EAS) in adults, but this topic remains underexplored in children. The goal of this study was to explore factors relating to hearing preservation, acceptance, and benefits of EAS for children., Study Design: Retrospective review., Setting: Tertiary academic medical center., Patients: Forty children (48 ears) with preoperative low-frequency pure-tone averages of 75 dB HL or less at 250 and 500 Hz (n = 48)., Intervention: All patients underwent cochlear implantation with a standard-length electrode., Main Outcome Measure: Low-frequency audiometric thresholds, speech perception, and EAS usage were measured at initial stimulation, and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Outcomes were compared between children with and without hearing preservation, and between EAS users and nonusers., Results: Hearing was preserved at similar rates as adults but worse for children with an enlarged vestibular aqueduct. Fewer than half of children who qualified to use EAS chose to do so, citing a variety of audiologic and nonaudiologic reasons. No differences were detected in speech perception scores across the groups for words, sentences, or sentences in noise tests., Conclusions: Neither hearing preservation nor EAS use resulted in superior speech perception in children with preoperative residual hearing; rather, all children performed well after implantation., (Copyright © 2023, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.)

Purpose: Severe hearing loss is particularly prevalent among Veterans. In response, the Veterans Affairs (VA) provides hearing aids and cochlear implants as part of their comprehensive hearing loss treatment. The VA's national health care system and integrated electronic health records offer a unique opportunity to examine patterns and outcomes in the management of severe hearing loss., Method: We retrospectively reviewed an urban VA center's database for all Veterans who underwent cochlear implantation between 2010 and 2019. We collected preoperative demographic and audiological data including cochlear implant outcomes., Results: During the study period, 61 Veterans received a cochlear implant, totaling 70 ears implanted. Median age at implantation was 70.2 years. Over 90% of Veterans reported preoperative hearing aid use, and median preoperative four-frequency pure-tone average and aided word recognition score in the ear to be implanted were 100 dB HL and 7%, respectively. The median onset of severe hearing loss bilaterally was over 4 years prior to cochlear implant evaluation based on available audiometric data. Postoperative word recognition score was negatively correlated with self-reported duration of hearing loss., Conclusions: This study provides unique insights into how Veterans with severe hearing loss are managed at one VA center. Compared to data published on cochlear implant recipients in the civilian population, Veterans in this cohort were older and had higher rates of preoperative hearing aid use. Available VA data suggest most Veterans were appropriate candidates for cochlear implant referral years prior to undergoing an evaluation. Reasons for treatment delays in this population remain to be studied.

Objectives: The current study aimed to identify and map the available evidence surrounding cochlear implantation (CI) in older adults. Five outcomes were evaluated: speech perception scores, perioperative complications, neurocognitive outcomes, quality of life outcomes and vestibular dysfunction and fall rates after surgery., Methods: A scoping review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews and included patients over the age of 60., Results: Ninety-seven studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 7,182 patients. Mean (SD) speech perception scores in quiet and in noise pre-and postoperatively were 7.9% (6.7) and 52.8% (14.3) and 8.0% (68.1) and 68.1% (15.9) respectively. Postoperative cardiac arrhythmias, urinary retention, and delirium occurred slightly more frequently in older adults. In terms of cognition, most studies noted stability or improvement one year after implantation. A majority of studies indicated better quality of life post-CI. Rates of fall after surgery were rarely reported, and there was a general paucity of data surrounding vestibular function changes after CI., Discussion: This scoping review identifies many positive outcomes linked to CI in older adults. No findings suggest a single patient characteristic that would warrant refusal to consider evaluation for cochlear implantation.

Objectives: Age of cochlear implantation (CI) is an important predictor of language development in those with congenital sensorineural hearing loss. Despite universal newborn hearing screening initiatives and the known benefits of early CI, a subset of congenitally deaf children continue to be evaluated for cochlear implants later in childhood. This study aims to identify the barriers to early cochlear implantation in these children., Methods: A retrospective review was conducted for all pediatric cochlear implants aged 3 years or older performed at a single academic institution between 2013 and 2017. Children implanted before the age three, those with a prior unilateral cochlear implant, and those with progressive or sudden hearing loss were excluded. Variables included newborn hearing screen results, age at hearing loss diagnosis, time of initiation and documented benefit of hearing aids, age of implantation, pre/post-implantation evaluation scores, and reason for delayed referral for cochlear implantation., Results: Thirty-one patients were identified meeting these inclusion criteria. Twenty-one children were subject to UNBS in the U.S. Fourteen of those children failed their newborn hearing screening. Average age at implantation was 6.2 years. Four reasons were identified for increased age at cochlear implantation. Two categories represent delays related to (1) Amplification continually prescribed even though the range of hearing loss and speech development assessment suggests CI may have been more appropriate well before referral (N = 13) (2) Patients were not subject to newborn hearing screening and/or timely diagnosis of their hearing loss (N = 8). In other cases, patients were appropriately fit with hearing aids until evidence that they derived limited benefit and then referred for CI (N = 8). Lastly, in a few cases, records were indeterminate with regards to the timing and appropriate diagnosis of their hearing loss (N = 2)., Conclusion: Understanding the reasons for delayed cochlear implantation in congenitally deaf children might allow the development of targeted interventions to improve outcomes. Specifically, those children who were not referred before age 3 despite use of amplification with limited benefit offer one potential target population for earlier CI., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Untreated hearing loss is risk factor for dementia, depression and falls in the elderly population. The present study evaluated the outcomes of cochlear implantation in adults over age 85, including surgical outcomes, speech perception, and implant use., Methods: Retrospective chart review of 78 patients implanted at a tertiary academic medical center. Co-morbidities, pre-operative hearing thresholds and speech perception scores at 4 time points (pre-operative, and 3 months, 1, 2, and 3 years post-operatively) were collected from charts. Linear mixed models were used to account for missing data points., Results: Medical comorbidities such as hypertension (56%) and heart disease (53%) were common. Surgical complications were rare (5% or less) and minor. Local anesthesia was used for 71% of study patients implanted in the last three years. Significant improvements were seen for speech perception scores on monosyllabic words (37 percentage points), sentences in quiet (45 percentage points) and sentences in noise (28 percentage points). These improvements remained stable to at least two years post-activation. Seventy-one percent of patients wore their implant full time., Conclusion: Cochlear implantation is safe and effective for very elderly adults. The use of local anesthesia may increase adoption of cochlear implantation and thus improve the quality of life for this population.

Objective: To describe our institutional experience with cochlear implantation (CI) for rehabilitation of hearing loss in Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) patients., Study Design: Retrospective review between 1989 and 2019., Setting: Tertiary-care center., Patients: Twenty-four patients (67% female, mean age 45.6years) with NF2. Management of their ipsilateral vestibular schwannoma included microsurgery (n=12), stereotactic radiation (n=5), and observation (n=7)., Interventions: Cochlear implantation., Main Outcome Measures: Ability to obtain open-set speech, daily device usage and long-term device benefit., Results: All patients achieved some degree of sound awareness with CI. Nineteen patients (79%) achieved open-set speech understanding with a mean word-recognition score of 43% (range 0-88%). Patients with tumors 1.5 cm or less demonstrated the better speech understanding, without significant differences among treatment modalities. For tumors greater than 1.5 cm, patients who underwent microsurgery had a lower rate of open-set speech understanding compared to those treated with radiation or observation. Regular daily device use in 83% of patients was found. Long-term use (>10years) was observed in several patients, though some ultimately required reimplantation with an auditory brainstem implant due to progressive tumor growth. Mean follow-up duration was 4.1 years (range 0.4-15)., Conclusions: Cochlear implantation can be an effective treatment for hearing loss in NF2 patients provided the cochlear nerve is intact, regardless of prior management for the ipsilateral tumor. The degree of benefit varies and is influenced by tumor size. Management strategies that preserve the cochlear nerve maximize the interval during which a CI could be of benefit to NF2 patients., (Copyright © 2020, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.)

Objective: To describe our experience with adults undergoing cochlear implantation (CI) for treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD)., Study Design: Retrospective case review., Setting: Tertiary referral center., Patients: Fifty-three adults with SSD., Interventions: Unilateral CI., Main Outcome Measures: Speech perception testing in quiet and noise, tinnitus suppression, and device usage from datalogs., Results: The mean age at CI was 53.2 years (SD 11.9). The mean duration of deafness was 4.0 years (SD 7.8). The most common etiology was idiopathic sudden SNHL (50%). Word recognition improved from 8.7% (SD 15) preoperatively to 61.8% (SD 20) at a mean follow-up of 3.3 years (SD 1.8) (p < 0.0001). Adaptive speech recognition testing in the "binaural with CI" condition (speech directed toward the front and noise toward the normal hearing ear) revealed a significant improvement by 2.6-dB SNR compared to the preoperative unaided condition (p = 0.0002) and by 3.6-dB SNR compared to when a device to route sound to the contralateral side was used (p < 0.0001). Tinnitus suppression was reported to be complete in 23 patients (43%) and improved in 20 patients (38%) while the device was on. The addition of the CI did not lead to a decrement in hearing performance in any spatial configuration. Device usage averaged 8.7 (SD 3.7) hours/day., Conclusions: Cochlear implantation in adult SSD patients can suppress tinnitus and achieve speech perception outcomes comparable with CI in conventional candidates. Modest improvements in spatial hearing were also observed and primarily attributable to the head shadow effect. Careful patient selection and counseling regarding potential benefits are important to optimize outcomes., (Copyright © 2020, Otology & Neurotology, Inc.)

Objective: To evaluate the performance changes after sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in a pediatric population of bimodal cochlear implant (CI) users. To evaluate the factors which influence the parental and recipient decision to discontinue hearing aid use and seek a second implant., Study Design: Retrospective case review, within-subject comparison., Setting: Tertiary referral center., Patients: Thirty-one pediatric (<18 yr) bimodal CI users who underwent sequential bilateral CI., Interventions: Sequential bilateral CI., Main Outcome Measures: Parental and/or recipient's reasons for discontinuing their hearing aid and pursuing a second implant, device usage from datalogs, speech understanding in the bimodal and bilateral CI condition., Results: Parents/patients were motivated to pursue sequential bilateral CI based on their positive performance with CI1, the expectation of further improvement with a second CI, and the prospect of having a second independently functional ear. In the bimodal condition, mean word recognition score (WRS), sentence recognition in quiet (SIQ), and sentence recognition in noise (SIN) scores were 87.4, 97.3, and 92.9% respectively. At 1-year post-sequential bilateral CI, the mean WRS, SIQ, and SIN score were 92.7, 98.7, and 97.7%, respectively. The improvement in bilateral CI speech scores compared with bimodal scores was statistically significant for WRS (p = 0.015). A ceiling effect limited the ability to detect further meaningful differences on speech perception testing., Conclusions: The bilateral CI condition demonstrates equivalent or slightly superior performance compared with the bimodal condition. Several non-speech benefits were elicited from parents as reasons for pursuing a second implant. Close monitoring of the residual acoustic hearing, inquiring about the perceived benefits provided by the HA, and early counseling regarding the potential for sequential bilateral CI are important aspects in determining if and when a second implant is indicated.

Objective: Cochlear implant (CI) technology and techniques have advanced over the years. There has not been the same degree of change in programming and there remains a lack of standardization techniques. The purpose of this study is to compare performance in cochlear implant subjects using experienced clinician (EC) standard programming methods versus an Artificial Intelligence, FOX based algorithm for programming., Study Design: Prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study using within-subject experimental design SETTING:: Tertiary referral centers., Patients: Fifty-five adult patients with ≥ 3 months experience with a Nucleus 5, 6, Kanso, or 7 series sound processor., Intervention: Therapeutic Main Outcome Measures: CNC words and AzBio sentences in noise (+10 dB SNR) tests were administered in a soundproof booth followed by a direct connect psychoacoustic battery using the EC program. Tests were repeated 1 month later using the optimized FOX program. Subjective measures of patient satisfaction were also measured., Results: Performance for the EC program was compared to the FOX program for both measures. Group mean results revealed equivalent performance (Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA p = 0.934) with both programming methods. While some patients had better performance with the FOX method and some performed more poorly, the majority had equivalent performance and preferred the FOX system., Conclusion: The study demonstrated that on average, FOX outcomes are equivalent to those using traditional programming techniques. In addition, the FOX programming method can effect standardization across centers and increase access for many individuals who could benefit.

Objective: To characterize the performance plateau after unilateral cochlear implantation (CI) in prelingually and postlingually deafened adults and to compare their relative progress., Study Design: Retrospective chart review., Setting: Tertiary referral center., Patients: Prelingually and postlingually deaf adults who received a unilateral CI and completed a minimum of 2 years of follow-up at our center., Intervention: Unilateral CI., Main Outcome Measures: Standard speech perception testing (consonant-nucleus-consonant [CNC] monosyllabic word test and hearing in noise test [HINT] or AzBio sentence test) were performed preoperatively and 3 and 12 months postoperatively, and annually thereafter., Results: In postlingually deaf patients (n = 102), there was a significant improvement in word scores for 3 years postimplantation (p < 0.01). Beyond the 3 years postoperative time point, word scores continued to improve, albeit at a flatter rate. In prelingually deaf patients (n = 16) word scores improved significantly for 5 years postimplantation (p = 0.03)., Conclusions: Adults with postlingual deafness undergoing unilateral CI show significant improvement in speech perception for 3 years postimplantation, at which point their performance continues to improve, albeit at a flatter rate. The performance of adults with prelingual deafness improves significantly as late as 5 years postimplantation. These time intervals reflect a change to the currently reported 6 to 12 months period and should impact on counseling, especially in the prelingual CI candidate.

Ninety-four unilateral CI patients with bimodal listening experience (CI plus HA in contralateral ear) completed a questionnaire that focused on attitudes toward hearing aid use postimplantation, patterns of usage, and perceived bimodal benefits in daily life. Eighty participants continued HA use and 14 discontinued HA use at the time of the questionnaire. Participant responses provided useful information for counseling patients both before and after implantation. The majority of continuing bimodal (CI plus HA) participants reported adapting to using both devices within 3 months and also reported that they heard better bimodally in quiet, noisy, and reverberant conditions. They also perceived benefits including improved sound quality, better music enjoyment, and sometimes a perceived sense of acoustic balance. Those who discontinued HA use found either that using the HA did not provide additional benefit over the CI alone or that using the HA degraded the signal from the CI. Because there was considerable overlap in the audiograms and in speech recognition performance in the unimplanted ear between the two groups, we recommend that unilateral CI recipients are counseled to continue to use the HA in the contralateral ear postimplantation in order to determine whether or not they receive functional or perceived benefit from using both devices together.

Objective: The aim of this case series was to assess the impact of auditory rehabilitation with cochlear implantation on the cognitive function of elderly patients over time., Design: This is a longitudinal case series of prospective data assessing neurocognitive function and speech perception in an elderly cohort pre- and post-implantation., Setting: University cochlear implant center., Participants: The patients were post-lingually deafened elderly female (mean, 73.6 years; SD, 5.82; range, 67-81 years) cochlear implant recipients (n=7)., Measurements: A neurocognitive battery of 20 tests assessing intellectual function, learning, short- and long-term memory, verbal fluency, attention, mental flexibility, and processing speed was performed prior to and 2-4.1 years (mean, 3.7) after cochlear implant (CI). Speech perception testing using Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant words was performed prior to implantation and at regular intervals postoperatively. Individual and aggregate differences in cognitive function pre- and post-CI were estimated. Logistic regression with cluster adjustment was used to estimate the association (%improvement or %decline) between speech understanding and years from implantation at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years post-CI., Results: Improvements after CI were observed in 14 (70%) of all subtests administered. Declines occurred in five (25%) subtests. In 55 individual tests (43%), post-CI performance improved compared to a patient's own performance before implantation. Of these, nine (45%) showed moderate or pronounced improvement. Overall, improvements were largest in the verbal and memory domains. Logistic regression demonstrated a significant relationship between speech perception and cognitive function over time. Five neurocognitive tests were predictive of improved speech perception following implantation., Conclusion: Comprehensive neurocognitive testing of elderly women demonstrated areas of improvement in cognitive function and auditory perception following cochlear implantation. Multiple neurocognitive tests were strongly associated with current speech perception measures. While these data shed light on the complex relationship between hearing and cognition by showing that CI may slow the expected age-related cognitive decline, further research is needed to examine the impact of hearing rehabilitation on cognitive decline.

Objectives: Although there are various available treatment options for unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss, these options do not provide the benefits of binaural hearing since sound is directed from the poorer ear to the better ear. The purpose of this investigation was to review our center's experience with cochlear implantation in such patients in providing improved auditory benefits and useful binaural hearing., Study Design: Retrospective chart review., Methods: Twelve adult patients and four pediatric patients with unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss received an implant in the poorer ear. Outcome measures performed preoperatively on each ear and binaurally included consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) monosyllabic words and sentences in noise. The mean pure-tune average in the better ear was within normal range., Results: Test scores revealed a significant improvement in CNC and sentence in noise test scores from the preoperative to most recent postoperative evaluation in the isolated implant ear. All adult subjects use the device full-time., Conclusions: The data reveal significant improvement in speech perception performance in quiet and in noise in patients with single-sided deafness after implantation. Performance might depend on factors including length of hearing loss, age at implantation, and device usage.

Objectives: To examine the variables affecting outcomes for sequential bilateral cochlear implantation patients in the adolescent population., Study Design: Retrospective chart review at tertiary care center., Methods: Main outcome measures were open set speech recognition tests at the word (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant/Phonetically Balanced Kindergarten List Test [CNC/PBK]) and sentence levels in noise (Hearing in Noise Test-Noise [HINT-N]) in different test conditions with respect to the age at first and sequential implantation, as well as the interval between implants., Results: Despite a mean age at sequential implantation of 13.5 years, sequential bilateral implanted adolescents revealed significant improvement in the sequential cochlear implant (CI2) ear. The mean time interval between implants was 8.2 years. A wide range of performance was noted, and age at implantation and interval between first cochlear implant (CI1) and CI2 did not predict outcome. Mean CNC/PBK score with CI1 alone was 83.0%, with the CI2 alone was 56.5%, and with bilateral implants was 86.8%. Sentence scores (HINT-N) were 89.5% for CI1, 74.2% for CI2, and 94.4% for bilateral CI condition. The clinical relevance of these enhanced perception abilities requires attention to individual device use, performance with the first implant, and subjective benefits reported by patients., Conclusions: Bilateral sequential cochlear implantation leads to improved speech perception in the adolescent population and should be considered in this population, even after a long period of deafness and despite a prolonged interval between implants. Numerous factors affect the ability to predict performance, but age at implantation and interimplant interval were not correlated with performance measures. Extensive preoperative counseling and individualized evaluation are critical to ensure that patients and families understand the range of possible outcomes., Level of Evidence: 4, (© 2015 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

This article highlights variables that affect cochlear implant performance, emerging factors warranting consideration, and variables shown not to affect performance. Research on the outcomes following cochlear implantation has identified a wide spectrum of variables known to affect pos0timplantation performance. These variables relate to the device itself as well as individual patient characteristics. Factors believed to affect spiral ganglion cell survival and function have been shown to influence postoperative performance. Binaural hearing affects performance. Social and educational factors also affect postoperative performance. Novel variables capable of affecting performance continue to emerge with increased understanding of auditory pathway development and neural plasticity., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine whether significant differences in cochlear implant (CI) performance exist between older and younger CI recipients., Design: Retrospective comparison of audiometric data., Setting: University hospital center., Participants: Sixty participants who received CIs at age 70 and older and 48 younger adults implanted between age 18 and 69., Measurements: Speech outcome scores (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant words and phonemes and City University of New York Sentence test in quiet and noise)., Results: Older participants show significant improvement in speech perception scores after implantation. Although on average they do not perform as well as younger adults, this difference correlates with duration of deafness rather than age. In contrast to younger adults, significant differences in CI performance are seen in older recipients depending on the side of implantation, with those implanted on the right performing better than those implanted on the left., Conclusion: Postlingually deafened older adults obtained significant speech perception benefits from CIs, although differences in speech outcomes were seen between younger recipients and those implanted after age 70. In older adults considering CIs, hearing benefits appear greater if they are implanted in the right ear., (© 2011, Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2011, The American Geriatrics Society.)

Objective: To investigate whether children implanted in the first year of life show higher levels of speech perception than later-implanted children, when compared at the same ages and to investigate the time course of sensitive periods for developing speech perception skills. More specifically, to determine whether faster gains in speech perception are made by children implanted before 1 year old relative to those implanted at 2 or 3 years., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Tertiary academic referral center., Patients: 117 children with congenital profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, with no additional identified disabilities., Intervention: Cochlear implantation in the first, second, or third year of life., Main Outcome Measure: Development curves showing Lexical Neighborhood Test (LNT) word identification scores as a function of age., Results: Children implanted within the first year of life have a mean advantage of 8.2% LNT-easy word scores over those implanted in the second year (p < 0.001) and a 16.8% advantage in LNT-easy word scores over those implanted in the third year of life (p < 0.001). These advantages remained statistically significant after accounting for sex, residual hearing, and bilateral cochlear implant use. When speech perception scores were expressed as a function of "hearing age" rather than chronological age, however, there were no significant differences among the 3 groups., Conclusion: There is a clear speech perception advantage for earlier-implanted children over later-implanted children when compared at the same age but not when compared at the same time after implantation. Thus, the sensitive period for developing word identification seems to extend at least until age 3 years.

Objective: To examine speech perception outcomes as related to a reduction in the number of functional electrodes postimplantation and to determine the effect of electrode reduction on subsequent device failure., Study Design: Retrospective review., Setting: Tertiary academic referral center., Patients: Of 1,520 children and adults with full insertions of the Advanced Bionics, Med El, and Nucleus devices, 15 (1%) were patients. Patients were included in the study if all electrodes were functional at initial stimulation, but the number of electrodes in use was subsequently reduced at follow-up programming sessions. Exclusion criteria included partial and split-array electrode insertions., Intervention(s): Patients with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss underwent either unilateral or bilateral cochlear implantation., Main Outcome Measure(s): Postimplantation speech perception tests obtained with a full complement of functional electrodes were performed and the results compared to those obtained with 1 or more electrodes removed from the user program. Electrode deactivation was also correlated with device failure., Results and Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that deactivation of cochlear implant electrodes is relatively uncommon, and although the deactivation does not have a direct influence on speech performance outcomes, the loss of 5 or more electrodes can suggest impending device failure. Additionally, those patients with electrode deactivation coupled with a decline in speech perception scores should also be considered at risk for device failure.

Objective: To examine speech perception outcomes and determine the impact of length of deafness and time between implants on performance in the sequentially bilateral implanted population., Study Design: Retrospective review., Setting: Tertiary academic referral center., Patients: Forty-three children (age, <18 yr) and 22 adults underwent sequential bilateral implantation with at least 6 months between surgeries. The mean age at the time of the second implant in children was 7.83 years, and mean time between implants was 5.16 years. Five children received the first side implant (C1) below 12 months of age; 16, at 12 to 23 months; 9, between the ages of 24 and 35 months; and 11, at 36 to 59 months; 2 were implanted above the age of 5 years. In adults, mean age at second implant was 46.6 years, and mean time between implants was 5.6 years., Intervention: Sequential implantation with 6 months or more between implantations., Main Outcome Measures: Speech perception tests were performed preoperatively before the second implantation and at 3 months postoperatively., Results: Results revealed significant improvement in the second implanted ear and in the bilateral condition, despite time between implantations or length of deafness; however, age of first-side implantation was a contributing factor to second ear outcome in the pediatric population., Conclusion: Sequential bilateral implantation leads to significantly better speech understanding. On average, patients improved, despite length of deafness, time between implants, or age at implantation.

Objective: Emerging evidence in auditory neuroscience suggests that central auditory pathways process speech asymmetrically. In concert with left cortical specialization for speech, a "right-ear advantage" in speech perception has been identified. The purpose of this study is to determine if this central asymmetry in speech processing has implications for selecting the ear for cochlear implantation., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Academic university medical center, Patients: One hundred one adults with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss, Intervention: Cochlear implantation with the Nucleus 24 Contour device., Main Outcome Measurements: Patients were divided into two groups according to the ear implanted. Results were compared between left-ear- and right-ear-implanted patients. Further subgroup analysis was undertaken, limited to right-handed patients. Postoperative improvement on audiograms and scores on speech perception tests (Hearing in Noise test, City University of New York in quiet and in noise test, Consonant-Vowel Nucleus- Consonant words, and phonemes) at 1 year was compared between groups. Analysis of covariance was used to control for any intergroup differences in preoperative characteristics., Results: The groups were matched in age, duration of hearing loss, duration of hearing aid use, percentage implanted in the better hearing ear, and preoperative audiologic testing. Postoperatively, there were no differences between left-ear- and right-ear-implanted patients in improvement on speech recognition tests., Conclusion: Despite central asymmetry in speech processing, our data do not support a right-ear advantage in speech perception outcomes with cochlear implantation. Therefore, among the many factors in choosing the ear for cochlear implantation, central asymmetry in speech processing does not seem to be a contributor to postoperative speech recognition outcomes.

Objective: Perimodiolar electrode arrays were developed in an attempt to improve stimulation of specific neural populations and to decrease electrical thresholds, thereby decreasing power consumption. Postoperative radiographs show that coiling of the arrays is variable. Our previous study explored the relationship between the angle of coiling, threshold levels, and functional outcomes using the Nucleus Contour electrode array. This study compares coiling angle, electrical threshold levels, and speech perception measures with the Nucleus Contour Advance electrode array implanted using the new advance off stylet technique versus the Nucleus Contour electrode array implanted using the standard technique., Study Design: Retrospective review., Setting: University medical center., Patients: Forty-two adults and children with normal cochlear anatomy implanted with the Nucleus CI24RCA electrode using the advance off stylet technique with at least 1-year follow-up., Intervention: Therapeutic., Main Outcome Measures: Computer-aided radiographic analysis of perimodiolar electrode placement, electrical threshold measurements, and speech perception outcome measures at 1 year postimplantation., Results: The degree of modiolar coiling was tighter using the new electrode and technique in comparison with standard insertion technique using the Nucleus Contour electrode array. The tighter coiling tended to result in higher electrical thresholds. Lower speech perception outcome measures tended to correlate with a higher degree of coiling., Conclusion: The Nucleus Contour Advance electrode array combined with the advance off stylet technique resulted in a more consistent perimodiolar position. However, the tighter coiling resulted in statistically significant increased electrical thresholds and decreased speech perception outcomes. This finding may be secondary to multiple factors, not just coiling angle.

Objective: Perimodiolar electrode arrays were developed to improve stimulation of specific neural populations and to decrease power consumption. Postoperative radiographs suggest that some arrays are more tightly coiled than others. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the degree of modiolar coil correlates with electrical threshold and/or performance measures postimplantation with the Nucleus CI24RCS (Contour) device., Study Design: Retrospective review., Setting: Cochlear implant center and a tertiary care hospital., Patients: Twenty-eight adult cochlear implant recipients with normal cochlear anatomy who underwent implantation with the Nucleus C124RCS perimodiolar electrode and are at least 1 year postimplantation., Interventions: Therapeutic., Main Outcome Measures: Radiologic degree of perimodiolar electrode placement (determined by a computer algorithmic analysis) compared with electrical thresholds and standard speech perception outcome measures at 1 year postcochlear implantation., Results: No significant correlations were found between the degree of modiolar coiling of the electrode array and electrical thresholds and speech perception outcome measures at 1 year postcochlear implantation., Conclusions: The degree of coiling of a modiolar hugging electrode array was not directly correlated with the level of electrical thresholds or postoperative speech perception outcome measures. Appearance of coil tightness on postoperative radiographs could reflect either differences in array placement or intrinsic variations in cochlear anatomy, and variations in speech perception performance can be influenced by other factors, including length of deafness.

Background: Prior studies have shown an advantage for electro-acoustic stimulation (EAS) in cochlear implant (CI) patients with residual hearing, but the degree of benefit can vary. The objective was to explore which factors relate to performance with and acceptance of EAS for CI users with conventional-length electrodes. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted for adults with an average threshold of 75 dB hearing loss or better across 250 and 500 Hz preoperatively (n = 83). All patients underwent cochlear implantation with a conventional-length electrode. Low-frequency audiometric thresholds were measured at initial activation as well as 3 and 12 months postoperatively to determine who met the criteria for EAS. Speech perception for CNC words and AzBio sentences in quiet and +10 dB SNR noise was evaluated 3 and 12 months after activation. Results: Speech perception in quiet and noise was similar regardless of whether or not the patient was eligible for EAS. Less than half of the patients who met the EAS criteria chose to use it, citing reasons such as physical discomfort or lack of perceived benefit. EAS users performed better on CNC words but not sentence recognition than EAS nonusers. Conclusions: EAS use is dependent on audiologic and nonaudiologic issues. Hearing preservation is possible with conventional electrodes, but hearing preservation alone does not guarantee superior speech perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing has become a priority in cochlear implantation. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of hearing preservation and effects on performance of loss of low-frequency acoustic hearing with two different length electrodes.Study Design: Retrospective chart review.Setting: Tertiary Care Hospital.Patients: Twelve patients were implanted with the CI422 a slim-straight electrode; the second group consisted of 10 patients implanted with the Hybrid-L, a shorter hearing preservation electrode.Main Outcome Measure: Audiometric thresholds and speech perception measures.Results: At 1 year, 3/10 (30%) patients with the Hybrid-L and 7/12 (58%) patients with the CI422 lost residual acoustic hearing resulting in a profound hearing loss in the implanted ear. In comparing these patients in particular, mean CNC words in the implanted ear were 72% in the CI422 electrode group and 15% in the Hybrid-L electrode group at 1 year (P = 0.03). While hearing preservation rates with the Hybrid-L tended to be better, among recipients who lost residual hearing, speech perception was better in those with the longer CI422 electrode.Conclusions: With emphasis on preservation of residual hearing, patients need to be counseled regarding possible outcomes and options should loss of residual hearing occur following implantation. While shorter electrodes may have better rates of hearing preservation, the patients with the longer straight electrode in our study had significantly better speech understanding following the loss of residual hearing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

\nIntroduction: The aim of this study was to examine how bimodal stimulation affects quality of life (QOL) during the postoperative period following cochlear implantation (CI). These data could potentially provide evidence to encourage more bimodal candidates to continue hearing aid (HA) use after CI. Methods: In this prospective study, patients completed preoperative and 1-, 3-, and 6-month post-activation QOL surveys on listening effort, speech perception, sound quality/localization, and hearing handicap. Fifteen HA users who were candidates for contralateral CI completed the study (mean age 65.6 years). Results: Patients used both devices at a median rate of 97%, 97%, and 98% of the time at 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. On average, patients’ hearing handicap scores decreased by 16% at 1 month, 36% at 3 months, and 30% at 6 months. Patients’ listening effort scores decreased by a mean of 10.8% at 1 month, 12.6% at 3 months, and 18.7% at 6 months. Localization significantly improved by 24.3% at 1 month and remained steady. There was no significant improvement in sound quality scores. Conclusion: Bimodal listeners should expect QOL to improve, and listening effort and localization are generally optimized using CI and HA compared to CI alone. Some scores improved at earlier time points than others, suggesting bimodal auditory skills may develop at different rates. This study investigated how using both a cochlear implant (CI) and a hearing aid (HA) in the other ear, known as bimodal stimulation, affects patient’s hearing-related quality of life after receiving a CI. We hoped our work could potentially encourage greater HA use among bimodal candidates. Researchers prospectively followed 15 individuals, with an average age of 65.6 years, and asked them to fill out surveys before their CI surgery, and then again 1, 3, and 6 months after they started using both devices. Patients used both the CI and HA around 97–98% time. Their ability to locate where sounds were coming from significantly improved by 1 month postop, although sound quality did not meaningfully change. Patients’ hearing handicap score substantially decreased by 3 months postop, meaning they had improved hearing-related quality of life. Their listening effort scores also significantly decreased by 6 months, and at that time point, patient survey responses demonstrated a subjective preference for using both devices rather than either device alone. Overall, using both a CI and a HA together generally improves hearing-related quality of life, listening effort, and sound localization early in the postoperative period. Our study suggests that patients should be encouraged to use their CI and HA for at least 6 months postoperatively because over time they may see additional benefits and improved satisfaction using both devices compared to their CI alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objective To assess auditory brainstem implant (ABI) outcomes in children with a prospective study. Methods Twelve patients with cochlear nerve deficiency received an auditory brainstem implant. Patients were evaluated with age appropriate speech perception and production assessments, and health related quality of life (HRQoL) surveys for parents of subjects and for subjects if age appropriate. Results Twelve patients received an ABI without major complications. Eleven out of twelve received some auditory benefit from their ABI. Parental HRQoL ratings were positive for all domains with the exception of communication. Self reported overall HRQoL metrics from two subjects were also positive. Conclusions ABI is a good option for patients who are not eligible for or fail CI. Our findings show that despite varying degrees of postoperative performance, HRQoL ratings were positive. The presence of additional disabilities and health problems resulted in less positive HRQoL outcomes. Our results emphasize the need to assess outcomes in these patients beyond speech perception and communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]