Masked Speech Perception with Bone Conduction Device, Contralateral Routing of Signals Hearing Aid, and Cochlear Implant Use in Adults with Single-Sided Deafness: A Prospective Hearing Device Comparison using a Unified Testing Framework.

INTRODUCTION: For the treatment of single-sided deafness (SSD), common treatment choices include a contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aid, a bone conduction device (BCD), and a cochlear implant (CI). The primary aim of this study was to compare speech understanding in noise and binaural benefits in adults with postlingual SSD between preoperative unaided baseline, preoperative CROS and BCD trial devices, and CI, following recommendations from a consensus protocol. In addition, we investigated the effect of masker type on speech understanding. METHODS: This was a prospective study with twelve participants. Binaural effects of head shadow, squelch, summation, and spatial release from masking were assessed by measuring speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in five different spatial target-masker configurations using two different maskers: two-talker babble (TTB), and speech-shaped noise (SSN). Preoperatively, participants were assessed unaided and with CROS and BCD trial devices. After cochlear implantation, participants were assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months post-activation. RESULTS: For TTB, significant improvements in SRT with a CI relative to preoperatively unaided were found in all spatial configurations. With CI at 6 months, median benefits were 7.8 dB in SSSDNAH and 5.1 dB in S0NAH (head shadow), 3.4 dB in S0N0 (summation), and 4.6 dB in S0NSSD and 5.1 dB in SAHNSSD (squelch). CROS yielded a significant head shadow benefit of 2.4 dB in SSSDNAH and a significant deterioration in squelch of 2.5 dB in S0NSSD and SAHNSSD, but no summation effect. With BCD, there was a significant summation benefit of 1.5 dB, but no head shadow nor squelch effect. For SSN, significant improvements in SRT with CI compared to preoperatively unaided were found in three spatial configurations. Median benefits with CI at 6 months were: 8.5 dB in SSSDNAH and 4.6 dB in S0NAH (head shadow), 1.4 dB in S0N0 (summation), but no squelch. CROS showed a significant head shadow benefit of 1.7 dB in SSSDNAH, but no summation effect, and a significant deterioration in squelch of 2.9 dB in S0NSSD and 3.2 dB in SAHNSSD. With BCD, no binaural effect was obtained. Longitudinally, we found significant head shadow benefits with a CI in SSSDNAH in both maskers at all postoperative intervals and in S0NAH at 3 and 6 months post-activation. CONCLUSION: With a CI, a clear benefit for masked speech perception was observed for all binaural effects. Benefits with CROS and BCD were more limited. CROS usage was detrimental to the squelch effect.

Long-Term Outcome of Cochlear Implantation in Children With Congenital, Perilingual, and Postlingual Single-Sided Deafness.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the long-term outcomes of children with single-sided deafness (SSD) after cochlear implant (CI) surgery, during and after rehabilitation, and compared the results of children with congenital, perilingual, and postlingual SSD. We evaluated the impact of SSD at age at onset and duration of deafness on their performance. DESIGN: Thirty-six children with SSD treated with CI participated in the study: 20 had congenital, seven perilingual (defined: >0 to 4 years), and nine had postlingual deafness (defined as >4 years of age). Their outcome with CI were measured on both subjective and objective scales: duration of device use, speech intelligibility in noise and in quiet, bilateral hearing and localization ability, quality of life and hearing, presence and loudness of tinnitus, and hearing ability of the better hearing ear. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up time of 4.75 years, 32 of the 36 children used their CI on a regular basis. The remaining four children were nonusers. These children had congenital SSD and were older than three years at the time of CI surgery. Overall, for congenital/perilingual and postlingual SSD, speech intelligibility in noise and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) speech subscore were significantly improved, as were their subjective and objective localization ability and hearing-related quality of life. Children with postlingual SSD benefited from the CI with regard to speech intelligibility, SSQ speech/spatial/total score, and localization error, and children with congenital SSD showed better results with a short duration of deafness of less than 3 years compared with those with a longer deafness period. CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implantation is a successful treatment for children with congenital/perilingual or postlingual SSD. Results largely differed with respect to the onset and duration of deafness, and better outcomes were achieved by children with postlingual SSD and with a short duration of deafness. Our data also confirmed that children with congenital SSD should be implanted with a CI within three years of age.

International Consensus Statements on Intraoperative Testing for Cochlear Implantation Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: A wide variety of intraoperative tests are available in cochlear implantation. However, no consensus exists on which tests constitute the minimum necessary battery. We assembled an international panel of clinical experts to develop, refine, and vote upon a set of core consensus statements. DESIGN: A literature review was used to identify intraoperative tests currently used in the field and draft a set of provisional statements. For statement evaluation and refinement, we used a modified Delphi consensus panel structure. Multiple interactive rounds of voting, evaluation, and feedback were conducted to achieve convergence. RESULTS: Twenty-nine provisional statements were included in the original draft. In the first voting round, consensus was reached on 15 statements. Of the 14 statements that did not reach consensus, 12 were revised based on feedback provided by the expert practitioners, and 2 were eliminated. In the second voting round, 10 of the 12 revised statements reached a consensus. The two statements which did not achieve consensus were further revised and subjected to a third voting round. However, both statements failed to achieve consensus in the third round. In addition, during the final revision, one more statement was decided to be deleted due to overlap with another modified statement. CONCLUSIONS: A final core set of 24 consensus statements was generated, covering wide areas of intraoperative testing during CI surgery. These statements may provide utility as evidence-based guidelines to improve quality and achieve uniformity of surgical practice.

Minimum intraoperative testing battery for cochlear implantation: the international practice trend.

PURPOSE: In cochlear implantation (CI) surgery, there are a wide variety of intraoperative tests available. However, no clear guide exists on which tests must be performed as the minimum intraoperative testing battery. Toward this end, we studied the usage patterns, recommendations, and attitudes of practitioners toward intraoperative testing. METHODS: This study is a multicentric international survey of tertiary referral CI centers. A survey was developed and administered to a group of CI practitioners (n = 34) including otologists, audiologists and biomedical engineers. Thirty six participants were invited to participate in this study based on a their scientific outputs to the literature on the intraoperative testing in CI field and based on their high load of CI surgeries. Thirty four, from 15 countries have accepted the invitation to participate. The participants were asked to indicate the usage trends, perceived value, influence on decision making and duration of each intraoperative test. They were also asked to indicate which tests they believe should be included in a minimum test battery for routine cases. RESULTS: Thirty-two (94%) experts provided responses. The most frequently recommended tests for a minimum battery were facial nerve monitoring, electrode impedance measurements, and measurements of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs). The perceived value and influence on surgical decision-making also varied, with high-resolution CT being rated the highest on both measures. CONCLUSION: Facial nerve monitoring, electrode impedance measurements, and ECAP measurements are currently the core tests of the intraoperative test battery for CI surgery.

Prediction of postoperative speech comprehension with the transcutaneous partially implantable bone conduction hearing system Osia®.

BACKGROUND: The active transcutaneous, partially implantable osseointegrated bone conduction system Cochlear™ Osia® (Cochlear, Sydney, Australia) has been approved for use in German-speaking countries since April 2021. The Osia is indicated for patients either having conductive (CHL) or mixed hearing loss (MHL) with an average bone conduction (BC) hearing loss of 55 dB HL or less, or having single-sided deafness (SSD). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the prediction of postoperative speech recognition with Osia® and to evaluate the speech recognition of patients with MHL and in particular an aided dynamic range of less than 30 dB with Osia®. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2017 and 2022, 29 adult patients were fitted with the Osia®, 10 patients (11 ears) with CHL and 19 patients (25 ears) with MHL. MHL was subdivided into two groups: MHL­I with four-frequency pure-tone average in BC (BC-4PTA) ≥ 20 dB HL and < 40 dB HL (n = 15 patients; 20 ears) vs. MHL-II with BC-4PTA ≥ 40 dB HL (n = 4 patients; 5 ears). All patients tested a bone conduction hearing device on a softband preoperatively. Speech intelligibility in quiet was assessed preoperatively using the Freiburg monosyllabic test in unaided condition, with the trial BCHD preoperatively and with Osia® postoperatively with Osia®. The maximum word recognition score (mWRS) unaided and the word recognition score (WRS) with the test system at 65 dB SPL were correlated with the postoperative WRS with Osia® at 65 dB SPL. RESULTS: Preoperative prediction of postoperative outcome with Osia® was better using the mWRS than by the WRS at 65 dB SPL with the test device on the softband. Postoperative WRS was most predictive for patients with CHL and less predictable for patients with mixed hearing loss with BC-4PTA ≥ 40 dB HL. For the test device on a softband, the achievable outcome tended to a minimum, with the mWRS tending to predict the realistically achievable outcome. CONCLUSION: Osia® can be used for the treatment of CHL and MHL within the indication limits. The average preoperative bone conduction hearing threshold also provides an approximate estimate of the postoperative WRS with Osia®, for which the most accurate prediction is obtained using the preoperative mWRS. Prediction accuracy decreases from a BC-4PTA of ≥ 40 dB HL.

Spatial speech-in-noise performance in simulated single-sided deaf and bimodal cochlear implant users in comparison with real patients.

OBJECTIVE: Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in spatial scenarios were measured in simulated cochlear implant (CI) listeners with either contralateral normal hearing, or aided hearing impairment (bimodal), and compared to SRTs of real patients, who were measured using the exact same paradigm, to assess goodness of simulation. DESIGN: CI listening was simulated using a vocoder incorporating actual CI signal processing and physiologic details of electric stimulation on one side. Unprocessed signals or simulation of aided moderate or profound hearing impairment was used contralaterally. Three spatial speech-in-noise scenarios were tested using virtual acoustics to assess spatial release from masking (SRM) and combined benefit. STUDY SAMPLE: Eleven normal-hearing listeners participated in the experiment. RESULTS: For contralateral normal and aided moderately impaired hearing, bilaterally assessed SRTs were not statistically different from unilateral SRTs of the better ear, indicating "better-ear-listening". Combined benefit was only found for contralateral profound impaired hearing. As in patients, SRM was highest for contralateral normal hearing and decreased systematically with more severe simulated impairment. Comparison to actual patients showed good reproduction of SRTs, SRM, and better-ear-listening. CONCLUSIONS: The simulations reproduced better-ear-listening as in patients and suggest that combined benefit in spatial scenes predominantly occurs when both ears show poor speech-in-noise performance.

[Prediction of speech understanding with the transcutaneous partially implantable bone conduction hearing system Osia®. German Version]. / Vorhersage des postoperativen Sprachverstehens mit dem transkutanen teilimplantierbaren Knochenleitungshörsystem Osia®.

BACKGROUND: The active transcutaneous, partially implantable osseointegrated bone conduction system Cochlear™ Osia® (Cochlear, Sydney, Australia) has been approved for use in German-speaking countries since April 2021. The Osia is indicated for patients with conductive (CHL) or mixed hearing loss (MHL) with an average bone conduction (BC) hearing loss of 55 dB or less, or with single-sided deafness (SSD). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the prediction of postoperative speech recognition with Osia and to evaluate the speech recognition of patients with MHL and an aided dynamic range of less than 30 dB with Osia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2017 and 2022, 29 adult patients were fitted with the Osia, 10 patients (11 ears) with CHL and 19 patients (21 ears) with MHL. MHL was subdivided into two groups: MHL­I with four-frequency pure-tone average in BC (BC-4PTA) ≥ 20 dB HL and < 40 dB HL (n = 15 patients; 20 ears) vs. MHL-II with BC-4PTA ≥ 40 dB HL (n = 4 patients; 5 ears). All patients tested a bone conduction hearing device on a softband preoperatively. Speech intelligibility in quiet was assessed preoperatively using the Freiburg monosyllabic test unaided and with the test system and postoperatively with Osia. The maximum monosyllabic score (mEV) unaided and the monosyllabic score with the test system at 65 dB SPL were correlated with the postoperative monosyllabic score with Osia at 65 dB SPL. RESULTS: Preoperative prediction of postoperative outcome with Osia was better using the mEV than the EV at 65 dB SPL with the test device on the softband. Postoperative EV was most predictive for patients with CHL and least predictive for patients with mixed hearing loss with 4PTA BC ≥ 40 dB HL. For the test device at softband, results tended to show the minimum achievable outcome and the mEV tended to predict the realistically achievable outcome. CONCLUSION: Osia can be used for the treatment of CHL and MHL within the indication limits. The average preoperative bone conduction hearing threshold also provides an approximate estimate of the postoperative EV with Osia, for which the most accurate prediction is obtained using the preoperative mEV. Prediction accuracy decreases from a BC-4PTA of ≥ 40 dB.

Instant improvement in monaural spatial hearing abilities through cognitive feedback.

Several studies report that sound localization performance of acute and chronic monauralized normal-hearing listeners can improve through training. Typically, training sessions are administered daily for several days or weeks. While this intensive training is effective, it may also be that monaural localization abilities improve instantly after providing explicit top-down information about the direction dependent change in timbre and level. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether cognitive feedback (i.e., top-down information) could instantly improve sound localization in naive acutely monauralized listeners. Forty-three normal-hearing listeners (experimental group), divided over five different centers, were tested. Two control groups, consisting of, respectively, nine and eleven normal-hearing listeners, were tested in one center. Broadband sounds (0.5-20 kHz) were presented from visible loudspeakers, positioned in azimuth (- 90° to 90°). Participants in the experimental group received explicit information about the noticeable difference in timbre and the poor localization in the monauralized listening condition, resulting in an instant improvement in sound localization abilities. With subsequent roving of stimulus level (20 dB), sound localization performance deteriorated immediately. The reported improvement is related to the context of the localization test. The results provide important implications for studies investigating sound localization in a clinical setting, especially during closed-set testing, and indicate the importance of top-down information.

Binaural Integration of Spectrally Degraded Speech in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients with Single-Sided Deafness.

INTRODUCTION: Our purpose was to investigate binaural integration for spectrally degraded speech in normal-hearing (NH) subjects, single-sided deafness (SSD) cochlear implant (CI) recipients, and bilateral deaf bilateral CI recipients. METHODS: We tested ten adult subjects in each group with a modified version of the binaural fusion test according to Matzker. Speech recognition was assessed for monotic listening with the better-hearing ear or CI, monotic listening with the poorer-hearing ear or CI, and dichotic listening. We employed two presentation modes: (1) low pass (LP)-filtered speech to the better ear or CI and high pass (HP)-filtered speech to the poorer ear or CI, and (2) LP-filtered speech to the poorer ear or CI and HP-filtered speech to the better ear or CI. Five magnitudes of LP and HP filtering, i.e., spectral degradation, for each presentation mode were applied yielding two spectrally overlapping and three nonoverlapping presentation conditions. Sentences from the Oldenburg Children's sentence test were applied to assess speech recognition. RESULTS: NH subjects, SSD CI recipients, and bilateral CI recipients were able to understand spectrally degraded speech under both monotic and dichotic listening conditions for both the presentation modes. Speech performance decreased with the increasing loss of spectral information in all the three subject groups. In the NH subjects, speech recognition scores significantly improved for dichotic compared with each monotic listening type under two spectrally nonoverlapping conditions. The SSD CI subjects showed a significant improvement in speech scores for dichotic listening compared with monotic listening with the NH ear under one nonoverlapping condition, i.e., a dichotic benefit in speech recognition with CI. We saw a dichotic benefit in the bilateral CI recipients who achieved significantly better speech scores for dichotic compared with monotic listening with the better CI in three nonoverlapping conditions. CONCLUSIONS: All the three groups (NH subjects, SSD CI recipients, and BiCI recipients) showed binaural integration for the side-separated presentation of spectrally degraded speech. Use of strictly side-separated dichotic stimulus presentation avoided the possible occurrence of physical effects such as the head shadow effect and therefore, confirmed the binaural benefit attributable to central binaural processing.

Long-term data of the new transcutaneous partially implantable bone conduction hearing system Osia®.

PURPOSE: The new active transcutaneous partially implantable osseointegrated system Cochlear™ Osia® System is indicated in case of conductive or mixed hearing loss (CHL/MHL) with a maximum average bone conduction hearing loss of 55 dB, or in single-sided deafness (SSD). The implant directly stimulates the bone via a piezoelectric transducer and is directed by an external sound processor. We conducted a monocentric retrospective longitudinal within-subject clinical study at our tertiary academic referral center. The aim was to investigate long-term data (2017-2021) on audiological outcomes and hearing-related quality of life for the Osia system. METHODS: Between 2017 and 2020, 22 adults (18: CHL/MHL; 3: SSD) were implanted with the Osia100 implant; seven received bilateral implants. As of 10/2020, the sound processor was upgraded to Osia 2. RESULTS: Mean Osia system use by 04/2021 was 30.9 ± 8.6 months (range 17-40 months). Unaided bone conduction thresholds were unchanged postoperatively. One patient had to be explanted because of prolonged wound infection. Aided hearing thresholds were significantly lower compared to the unaided thresholds preoperatively, along with a marked increase in speech recognition in quiet. Speech processor upgrade resulted in a stable benefit. Patients with CHL/MHL and SSD showed a similar improvement in self-rated hearing performance revealed by SSQ, APHAB, and HUI questionnaires. CONCLUSION: The Osia system is a safe, effective and sustainable option for treatment of conductive and mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness.

Bone-anchored hearing system, contralateral routing of signals hearing aid or cochlear implant: what is best in single-sided deafness?

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to compare long-term results after 1 year in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) who were fitted with different hearing aids. The participants tested contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aids and bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHS). They were also informed about the possibility of a cochlear implant (CI) and chose one of the three devices. We also investigated which factors influenced the choice of device. METHODS: Prospective study with 89 SSD participants who were divided into three groups by choosing BAHS, CROS, or CI. All participants received test batteries with both objective hearing tests (speech perception in noise and sound localisation) and subjective questionnaires. RESULTS: 16 participants opted for BAHS-, 13 for CROS- and 30 for CI-treatment. The greater the subjective impairment caused by SSD, the more likely patients were to opt for surgical treatment (BAHS or CI). The best results in terms of speech perception in noise (especially when sound reaches the deaf ear and noise the hearing ear), sound localization, and subjective results were achieved with CI. CONCLUSION: The best results regarding the therapy of SSD are achieved with a CI, followed by BAHS. This was evident both in objective tests and in the subjective questionnaires. Nevertheless, an individual decision is required in each case as to which SSD therapy option is best for the patient. Above all, the patient's subjective impairment and expectations should be included in the decision-making process.

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

PURPOSE: We investigated the long-term results of cochlear implant (CI) recipients with asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) or single-sided deafness (SSD). We focused on wearing behavior, audiometric hearing rehabilitation, and subjective benefits of the CI. CI is expected to improve audiological results, subjective hearing perception, and tinnitus burden. METHODS: Speech recognition in background noise and sound localization were assessed preoperatively and after at least six years of CI experience. Validated questionnaires determined the subjective benefit of CI use and the subjective evaluation of tinnitus. RESULTS: Over 80% of the included AHL and SSD CI recipients used their CI between 6 and 10 h daily; four subjects with SSD were non-users. Speech recognition in background noise and sound localization improved significantly compared with the unaided preoperative situation. Additionally, CI improved subjective speech intelligibility and spatial hearing impression while reducing tinnitus burden. CONCLUSION: Subjects with AHL and SSD benefit from CI, subjectively and audiologically. Cochlear implant is a successful long-term treatment for AHL and SSD.

Outcomes for a clinically representative cohort of hearing-impaired adults using the Nucleus® CI532 cochlear implant.

PURPOSE: Hearing performance data was collected from a large heterogeneous group of subjects implanted with the Cochlear™ Nucleus® CI532 with Slim Modiolar Electrode, for the purposes of postmarket clinical follow-up. Data was analysed for factors which may predict postoperative speech recognition scores. METHODS: Data was collected retrospectively from five German clinics for 159 subjects from March 2017 to August 2018. Hearing thresholds and recognition scores for monosyllabic words in quiet and sentences in noise were measured preoperatively and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: There was a mean gain of 44% points (95% CI 39-49%) at 6 months in monosyllable scores in quiet for implanted ears. Preoperative hearing thresholds in implant ears increased systematically with decreasing age; however, younger subjects had better baseline monosyllable scores with hearing aids compared with older subjects. Baseline performance alone explained 14% of the variation in postoperative scores. Residual hearing was preserved on average to within 22 dB at 250 Hz and 30 dB at 500 Hz of preoperative levels. CONCLUSIONS: In a large and varied cohort of routinely treated hearing-impaired adults, speech recognition with the CI532 for German monosyllabic words in quiet at 6 months was equivalent to performance reported at one year or more in other published studies. Although younger subjects had poorer preoperative pure-tone thresholds, they had better preoperative word recognition scores compared with older subjects, and also had higher post implant scores. Further research is required to identify if this phenomenon is just applicable to German health system assessment and referral practices.

Data Logging Evidence of Cochlear Implant Use in Single-Sided and Bilateral Deafness.

PURPOSE: This study analyses data logs in order to investigate the usage pattern of cochlear implant (CI) recipients with single-sided deafness (SSD-CI) and bilaterally deaf, uni- or bilaterally implanted CI recipients (Uni-CI and Bil-CI). Data logging is available from SCAN, an automated auditory scene classifier which categorizes auditory input into 6 listening environments. METHODS: CI usage data were retrospectively available from data logs of 206 CI recipients using the Nucleus 6 system obtained between January 2013 and June 2015. For all recipients, we analysed time on air and time spent in the listening environments. For statistical analysis, we matched the CI recipients according to age and duration of CI experience and classified them into 4 age groups. RESULTS: SSD-CI showed a similar time on air compared to Uni- and Bil-CI. Usage behaviour of SSD-CI was comparable to Uni- and Bil-CI regarding exposure to music, speech in quiet and speech in noise. With increasing age, exposure to quiet increased and exposure to music decreased across all CI recipient groups in relation to time on air. CONCLUSION: In total, the CI usage pattern of SSD-CI is comparable for the majority of listening environments and age groups to that of Uni- and Bil-CI. The results of our study show that SSD-CI benefit equally from CI implantation.

Minimal Reporting Standards for Active Middle Ear Hearing Implants.

There is currently no standardized method for reporting audiological, surgical and subjective outcome measures in clinical trials with active middle ear implants (AMEIs). It is often difficult to compare studies due to data incompatibility and to perform meta-analyses across different centres is almost impossible. A committee of ENT and audiological experts from Germany, Austria and Switzerland decided to address this issue by developing new minimal standards for reporting the outcomes of AMEI clinical trials. The consensus presented here aims to provide a recommendation to enable better inter-study comparability.

Towards a Unified Testing Framework for Single-Sided Deafness Studies: A Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: While hearing aids for a contralateral routing of signals (CROS-HA) and bone conduction devices have been the traditional treatment for single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL), in recent years, cochlear implants (CIs) have increasingly become a viable treatment choice, particularly in countries where regulatory approval and reimbursement schemes are in place. Part of the reason for this shift is that the CI is the only device capable of restoring bilateral input to the auditory system and hence of possibly reinstating binaural hearing. Although several studies have independently shown that the CI is a safe and effective treatment for SSD and AHL, clinical outcome measures in those studies and across CI centers vary greatly. Only with a consistent use of defined and agreed-upon outcome measures across centers can high-level evidence be generated to assess the safety and efficacy of CIs and alternative treatments in recipients with SSD and AHL. METHODS: This paper presents a comparative study design and minimum outcome measures for the assessment of current treatment options in patients with SSD/AHL. The protocol was developed, discussed, and eventually agreed upon by expert panels that convened at the 2015 APSCI conference in Beijing, China, and at the CI 2016 conference in Toronto, Canada. RESULTS: A longitudinal study design comparing CROS-HA, BCD, and CI treatments is proposed. The recommended outcome measures include (1) speech in noise testing, using the same set of 3 spatial configurations to compare binaural benefits such as summation, squelch, and head shadow across devices; (2) localization testing, using stimuli that rove in both level and spectral content; (3) questionnaires to collect quality of life measures and the frequency of device use; and (4) questionnaires for assessing the impact of tinnitus before and after treatment, if applicable. CONCLUSION: A protocol for the assessment of treatment options and outcomes in recipients with SSD and AHL is presented. The proposed set of minimum outcome measures aims at harmonizing assessment methods across centers and thus at generating a growing body of high-level evidence for those treatment options.

Cochlear implantation for hearing rehabilitation in single-sided deafness after translabyrinthine vestibular schwannoma surgery.

The aim of the study was to investigate the option of cochlear implantation (CI) in resultant single-sided deafness associated with unilateral translabyrinthine resection of sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS). This is a retrospective study performed at Tertiary Care Academic Centre. Following extensive counselling regarding the potential for delayed CI, translabyrinthine VS resection was performed and an intracochlear placeholder was inserted to allow later CI in 11 patients who showed intraoperative microscopic confirmation of preserved cochlear nerve anatomy. Follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and promontory testing were performed 1 year after surgery to confirm the absence of VS recurrence and viable cochlea. Confirmed CI candidates underwent a second procedure where the placeholder was removed and the CI inserted (4/11). Preimplant unaided and CI-aided evaluations at 12 and 24 months were performed for subjective and objective hearing outcomes. Tinnitus suppression was also measured for implant on and off effects. Available audiological data for three patients demonstrated significant hearing benefits for 'speech from deaf/implanted side, noise from the normal-hearing side' in all three patients and localisation ability improved for 2/3 patients. Subjective findings presented similar results. For the two patients with preimplant tinnitus, complete suppression occurred during active CI. CI is beneficial for hearing rehabilitation and tinnitus reduction in SSD patients with remaining viable cochlear nerve after translabyrinthine VS surgery. Counselling on the risks of intracochlear placeholder insertion and the inherent limitations for ongoing MRI investigations of VS recurrence is essential.

Cochlear implantation in children with single-sided deafness: does aetiology and duration of deafness matter?

For adult patients with single-sided deafness (SSD), treatment with a cochlear implant (CI) is well established as an acceptable and beneficial hearing rehabilitation method administered routinely in clinical practice. In contrast, for children with SSD, CI has been applied less often to date, with the rationale to decide either on a case-by-case basis or under the realm of clinical research. The aim of our clinical study was to evaluate the longitudinal benefits of CI for a group of children diagnosed with SSD and to compare their outcomes with respect to patient characteristics. Evaluating a pool of paediatric SSD patients presenting for possible CI surgery revealed that the primary aetiology of deafness was congenital cochlear nerve deficiency. A subgroup of children meeting the CI candidacy criteria for the affected ear (the majority with acquired hearing loss) were enrolled in the study. Preliminary group results suggest substantial improvements in speech comprehension in noise and in the ability to localise sound, which was demonstrated through objective and subjective assessments after CI treatment for the group, with results varying from patient to patient. Our study shows a trend towards superior outcomes for children with acquired hearing loss and a shorter duration of hearing loss compared to congenitally deafened children who had a longer duration of SSD. This indicates an interactive influence of the age at onset, aetiology and duration of deafness upon the restoration of binaural integration and the overall benefits of sound stimulation to two ears after CI treatment. Continued longitudinal investigation of these children and further studies in larger groups may provide more guidance on the optimal timing of treatment for paediatric patients with acquired and congenital SSD.