Is the cochlear implant a successful long-term solution for single-sided deaf and asymmetric hearing-impaired patients?

Speck, Iva; Challier, P; Wesarg, Thomas; Jakob, Till F.; Aschendorff, Antje; Hassepaß, Frederike; Arndt, Susan

doi:10.1007/s00405-020-06411-y

Cited by 21 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Speech recognition ability after cochlear implantation is heterogeneous, meaning that many patients reach openset speech recognition ability while others do not (Blamey et al 2013). Such variability can also be observed in SSD CI users (Speck et al 2021), as confirmed by the current results. Although all of our CI users were able to discriminate between the syllables /ki/ (standard) and /ka/ (deviant 1), several CI users showed difficulties in the discrimination of the syllable contrast /ki/ (standard) versus /ti/ (deviant 2).…”

Section: Question 1: Can a Two-deviant Oddball Paradigm Be Used To Ob...supporting

confidence: 85%

Side-of-Implantation Effect on Functional Asymmetry in the Auditory Cortex of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear-Implant Users

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochlear implants (CIs) allow to restore the hearing function in profoundly deaf individuals. Due to the degradation of the stimulus by CI signal processing, implanted individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) have the specific challenge that the input highly differs between their ears. The present study compared normal-hearing (NH) listeners (N = 10) and left- and right-ear implanted SSD CI users (N = 10 left, N = 9 right), to evaluate cortical speech processing between CI- and NH-ears and to explore for side-of-implantation effects. The participants performed a two-deviant oddball task, separately with the left and the right ear. Auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) in response to syllables were compared between proficient and non-proficient CI users, as well as between CI and NH ears. The effect of the side of implantation was analysed on the sensor and the source level. CI proficiency could be distinguished based on the ERP amplitudes of the N1 and the P3b. Moreover, syllable processing via the CI ear, when compared to the NH ear, resulted in attenuated and delayed ERPs. In addition, the left-ear implanted SSD CI users revealed an enhanced functional asymmetry in the auditory cortex than right-ear implanted SSD CI users, regardless of whether the syllables were perceived via the CI or the NH ear. Our findings reveal that speech-discrimination proficiency in SSD CI users can be assessed by N1 and P3b ERPs. The results contribute to a better understanding of the rehabilitation success in SSD CI users by showing that cortical speech processing in SSD CI users is affected by CI-related stimulus degradation and experience-related functional changes in the auditory cortex.

show abstract

Section: Question 1: Can a Two-deviant Oddball Paradigm Be Used To Ob...supporting

confidence: 85%

Side-of-Implantation Effect on Functional Asymmetry in the Auditory Cortex of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear-Implant Users

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, our study patients were highly motivated to return for follow-up visits, whereas in real-life compliance may not be as high. Possibly, non-use of initially started treatment may occur when follow-up time is longer [ 19 , 34 , 47 ]. We therefore implemented a follow-up period of five years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Single-sided deafness (SSD) leads to difficulties with speech perception in noise, sound localisation, and sometimes tinnitus. Current treatments (Contralateral Routing of Sound hearing aids (CROS) and Bone Conduction Devices (BCD)) do not sufficiently overcome these problems. Cochlear implants (CIs) may help. Our aim was to evaluate these treatments in a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT). Adult SSD patients were randomised using a web-based randomisation tool into one of three groups: CI; trial period of ‘first BCD, then CROS’; trial period of ‘first CROS, then BCD’. After these trial periods, patients opted for BCD, CROS, or No treatment. The primary outcome was speech perception in noise (directed from the front (S0N0)). Secondary outcomes were speech perception in noise with speech directed to the poor ear and noise to the better ear (SpeNbe) and vice versa (SbeNpe), sound localisation, tinnitus burden, and disease-specific quality of life (QoL). We described results at baseline (unaided situation) and 3 and 6 months after device activation. 120 patients were randomised. Seven patients did not receive the allocated intervention. The number of patients per group after allocation was: CI (n = 28), BCD (n = 25), CROS (n = 34), and No treatment (n = 26). In S0N0, the CI group performed significantly better when compared to baseline, and when compared to the other groups. In SpeNbe, there was an advantage for all treatment groups compared to baseline. However, in SbeNpe, BCD and CROS groups performed worse compared to baseline, whereas the CI group improved. Only in the CI group sound localisation improved and tinnitus burden decreased. In general, all treatment groups improved on disease-specific QoL compared to baseline. This RCT demonstrates that cochlear implantation for SSD leads to improved speech perception in noise, sound localisation, tinnitus burden, and QoL after 3 and 6 months of follow-up. For most outcome measures, CI outperformed BCD and CROS. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register (www.trialregister.nl): NTR4580, CINGLE-trial.

show abstract

“…Bilateral hearing could not be provided through these methods and was thought to remain out of reach for these children because of concerns that a hearing device in the deaf ear might disrupt the hearing in the normal hearing ear. Adults with single-side deafness have shown clear benefits of cochlear implantation 8 58 59 and studies are presently underway to determine the effectiveness of implantation in children with single-side deafness. 31 56 57 60 Early findings show that many children with single-side deafness do use their cochlear implants daily.…”

Section: Barriers Delay Bilateral Hearing In Children During Sensitive Periods In Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Importance of Access to Bilateral Hearing through Cochlear Implants in Children

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children with hearing loss require early access to sound in both ears to support their development. In this article, we describe barriers to providing bilateral hearing and developmental consequences of delays during early sensitive periods. Barriers include late identification of hearing loss in one or both ears and delayed access to intervention with hearing devices such as cochlear implants. Effects of delayed bilateral input on the auditory pathways and brain are discussed as well as behavioral effects on speech perception and other developmental outcomes including language and academics. Evidence for these effects has supported an evolution in cochlear implant candidacy in children that was started with unilateral implantation in children with profound deafness bilaterally to bilateral implantation to implantation of children with asymmetric hearing loss including children with single-side deafness. Opportunities to enhance the developmental benefits of bilateral hearing in children with hearing loss are also discussed including efforts to improve binaural/spatial hearing and consideration of concurrent vestibular deficits which are common in children with hearing loss.

show abstract

Is the cochlear implant a successful long-term solution for single-sided deaf and asymmetric hearing-impaired patients?

Cited by 21 publications

References 27 publications

Side-of-Implantation Effect on Functional Asymmetry in the Auditory Cortex of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear-Implant Users

Side-of-Implantation Effect on Functional Asymmetry in the Auditory Cortex of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear-Implant Users

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

The Importance of Access to Bilateral Hearing through Cochlear Implants in Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About