Different amplification options are available for listeners with congenital unilateral conductive hearing loss (UCHL). For example, bone-conduction devices (BCDs) and middle ear implants. The present study investigated whether intervention with an active BCD, the Bonebridge, or a middle ear implant, the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB), affected sound-localization performance of listeners with congenital UCHL. Listening with a Bonebridge or VSB might provide access to binaural cues. However, when fitted with the Bonebridge, but not with a VSB, binaural processing might be affected through cross stimulation of the contralateral normal hearing ear, and could interfere with processing of binaural cues. In the present study twenty-three listeners with congenital UCHL were included. To assess processing of binaural cues, we investigated localization abilities of broadband (BB, 0.5-20 kHz) filtered noise presented at varying sound levels. Sound localization abilities were analyzed separately for stimuli presented at the side of the normal-hearing ear, and for stimuli presented at the side of the hearing-impaired ear. Twenty-six normal hearing children and young adults were tested as control listeners. Sound localization abilities were measured under open-loop conditions by recording head-movement responses. We demonstrate improved sound localization abilities of children with congenital UCHL, when listening with a Bonebridge or VSB, predominantly for stimuli presented at the impaired (aided) side. Our results suggest that the improvement is not related to accurate processing of binaural cues. When listening with the Bonebridge, despite cross stimulation of the contralateral cochlea, localization performance was not deteriorated compared to listening with a VSB.

No abstract

Objectives: This study aims to characterize lateralization of sounds and localization of sounds in children with bilateral conductive hearing loss (BCHL) when listening with either one or two percutaneous bone conduction devices (BCDs). Design: Sound lateralization was measured with the minimum audible angle test in which children were asked to indicate from which of the two visible speakers the sound originated. Sound localization was measured with a test in which stimuli were presented from speakers that were not visible to the children. In the sound localization test, 150 ms broadband noise bursts were presented, and sound level was roved over a 20-dB range. Because speakers were not visible the localization response was not affected by any visual cue. The sound localization test provides a clear distinction between lateralization and localization of sounds. Ten children with congenital BCHL and one child with acquired BCHL participated. Results: Both lateralization and sound localization were better with bilateral BCDs compared with the unilaterally aided conditions. In the bilateral BCD condition, lateralization was close to normal in nearly all the children. The localization test demonstrated lateralization rather than sound localization behavior when listening with bilateral BCDs. Furthermore, in the unilateral aided condition, stimuli presented at different sound levels were mainly perceived at the same location. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that, in contrast to listening with two BCDs, children demonstrated difficulties in lateralization of sounds and in sound localization when listening with just one BCD (i.e., one BCD turned off). Because both lateralization and sound localization behavior were tested, it could be demonstrated that these children are more able to lateralize than localize sounds when listening with bilateral BCDs. The present study provides insight in (sub-optimal) sound localization capabilities of children with congenital BCHL in the unilateral-aided and bilateral-aided condition. Despite the sub-optimal results on sound localization, this study underlines the merits of bilateral application of BCDs in such children.

No abstract

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> A review of published data regarding binaural hearing after treatment of congenital unilateral conductive hearing loss (UCHL) due to aural atresia. Treatment options concern atresia surgery (reconstructive surgery), application of a bone conduction device (BCD), or application of a middle ear implant (MEI). <b><i>Data Sources:</i></b> Database PubMed was searched for articles published in English and German between January 1, 1994, and January 1, 2019. <b><i>Study Selection:</i></b> The initial search identified 52 studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. <b><i>Data Synthesis:</i></b> Comparison of studies was based on a structured review. Meta-analysis was not feasible because of the heterogeneity of outcome measures, the limited number of relevant papers (9), and diverse types of treatment (5). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Treatment of UCHL results in bilateral hearing instead of binaural hearing. The large intersubject variability in benefit of treatment is unexplained with a clear improvement in the minority of listeners and a limited improvement or binaural interference in most listeners after atresia repair or amplification with a BCD or MEI.