Rehabilitation of hearing communication through cochlear implantation in elderly patients results in improvements in speech perception and cognitive abilities and positively influences their social activity and quality of life. Further research is needed to assess the long-term effect of cochlear implantation on cognitive decline.

The results suggest that both techniques are useful and may be used together in a complementary fashion. Intracerebral recordings allow the researcher to validate and interpret surface recordings.

The Hearing Preservation Classification System proposed herein fulfills the following necessary criteria: 1) classification is independent from users' initial hearing, 2) it is appropriate for all cochlear implant users with measurable pre-operative residual hearing, 3) it covers the whole range of pure tone average from 0 to 120 dB; 4) it is easy to use and easy to understand.

Objective: To evaluate speech performance, in quiet and noise, and localization ability in adult patients who had undergone bilateral and simultaneous implantation. Study Design: Prospective multi-center study. Methods: Twenty-seven adult patients with profound or total hearing loss were bilaterally implanted in a single-stage procedure, and simultaneously activated (Med-El, Combi 40/40+). Subjects were assessed before implantation and at 3, 6 and 12 months after switch-on. Speech perception tests in monaural and binaural conditions were performed in quiet and in noise using disyllabic words, with speech coming from the front and a cocktail party background noise coming from 5 loudspeakers. Sound localization measurements were also performed in background noise coming from 5 loudspeakers positioned from –90° to +90° azimuth in the horizontal plane, and using a speech stimulus. Results: There was a bilateral advantage at 12 months in quiet (77 ± 5.0% in bilateral condition, 67 ± 5.3% for the better ear, p < 0.005) and in noise (signal-to-noise ratio +15 dB: 63 ± 5.9% in bilateral condition, 55 ± 6.9% for the better ear, p < 0.05). Considering unilateral speech scores recorded in quiet at 12 months, subjects were categorized as ‘good performers’ (speech comprehension score ≥60% for the better ear, n = 19) and ‘poor performers’ (n = 8). Subjects were also categorized as ‘asymmetrical’ (difference between their 2 unilateral speech scores ≥20%, n = 11) or ‘symmetrical’ (n = 16). The largest advantage (bilateral compared to the better ear) was obtained in poor performers: +19% compared to +7% in good performers (p < 0.05). In the group of good performers, there was a bilateral advantage only in cases of symmetrical results between the 2 ears (n = 10). In the group of poor performers, the bilateral advantage was shown in both patients with symmetrical (n = 6) and asymmetrical results (n = 2). In bilateral conditions, the sound localization ability in noise was improved compared to monaural conditions in patients with symmetrical and asymmetrical performance between the 2 ears. No preoperative factor (age, duration of deafness, use of hearing aids, etiology, etc.) could predict the asymmetrical performance, nor which ear would be the best. Conclusion: This study demonstrates a bilateral advantage (at 12 months after the implantation) in speech intelligibility and sound localization in a complex noisy environment. In quiet, this bilateral advantage is shown in cases of poor performance of both ears, and in cases of good performance with symmetrical results between the 2 ears. No preoperative factor can predict the best candidates for a simultaneous bilateral implantation.

MCI is highly prevalent in older adults with profound hearing loss. Nevertheless, we observed a low rate of progression to dementia, and cognitive function improved in some individuals with MCI at baseline. These results highlight that cochlear implantation should be strongly considered in profoundly deaf individuals, even those with MCI, who may have a specific subtype of MCI, with a possible positive effect of hearing rehabilitation on neurocognitive functioning.