Monitoring Cochlear Health With Intracochlear Electrocochleography During Cochlear Implantation: Findings From an International Clinical Investigation.

OBJECTIVES: Electrocochleography (ECochG) is emerging as a tool for monitoring cochlear function during cochlear implant (CI) surgery. ECochG may be recorded directly from electrodes on the implant array intraoperatively. For low-frequency stimulation, its amplitude tends to rise or may plateau as the electrode is inserted. The aim of this study was to explore whether compromise of the ECochG signal, defined as a fall in its amplitude of 30% or more during insertion, whether transient or permanent, is associated with poorer postoperative acoustic hearing, and to examine how preoperative hearing levels may influence the ability to record ECochG. The specific hypotheses tested were threefold: (a) deterioration in the pure-tone average of low-frequency hearing at the first postoperative follow-up interval (follow-up visit 1 [FUV1], 4 to 6 weeks) will be associated with compromise of the cochlear microphonic (CM) amplitude during electrode insertion (primary hypothesis); (b) an association is observed at the second postoperative follow-up interval (FUV2, 3 months) (secondary hypothesis 1); and (c) the CM response will be recorded earlier during electrode array insertion when the preoperative high-frequency hearing is better (secondary hypothesis 2). DESIGN: International, multi-site prospective, observational, between groups design, targeting 41 adult participants in each of two groups, (compromised CM versus preserved CM). Adult CI candidates who were scheduled to receive a Cochlear Nucleus CI with a Slim Straight or a Slim Modiolar electrode array and had a preoperative audiometric low-frequency average thresholds of ≤80 dB HL at 500, 750, and 1000 Hz in the ear to be implanted, were recruited from eight international implant sites. Pure tone audiometry was measured preoperatively and at postoperative visits (FUV1 and follow-up visit 2 [FUV2]). ECochG was measured during and immediately after the implantation of the array. RESULTS: From a total of 78 enrolled individuals (80 ears), 77 participants (79 ears) underwent surgery. Due to protocol deviations, 18 ears (23%) were excluded. Of the 61 ears with ECochG responses, amplitudes were < 1 µV throughout implantation for 18 ears (23%) and deemed "unclear" for classification. EcochG responses >1 µV in 43 ears (55%) were stable throughout implantation for 8 ears and compromised in 35 ears. For the primary endpoint at FUV1, 7/41 ears (17%) with preserved CM had a median hearing loss of 12.6 dB versus 34/41 ears (83%) with compromised CM and a median hearing loss of 26.9 dB ( p < 0.014). In assessing the practicalities of measuring intraoperative ECochG, the presence of a measurable CM (>1 µV) during implantation was dependent on preoperative, low-frequency thresholds, particularly at the stimulus frequency (0.5 kHz). High-frequency, preoperative thresholds were also associated with a measurable CM > 1 µV during surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows that CM drops occurring during electrode insertion were correlated with significantly poorer hearing preservation postoperatively compared to CMs that remained stable throughout the electrode insertion. The practicality of measuring ECochG in a large cohort is discussed, regarding the suggested optimal preoperative low-frequency hearing levels ( < 80 dB HL) considered necessary to obtain a CM signal >1 µV.

Longitudinal assessment of physiological and psychophysical measures in cochlear implant users.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of long-term electrical stimulation on human cochlear implant users. DESIGN: Repeated measures of electrically evoked auditory brain steam response (EABR) threshold, slope of the EABR growth function, and behavioral measures of threshold and dynamic range were made for a group of 22 Ineraid cochlear implant users and 19 Nucleus cochlear implant users over a 3- to 5-yr period. RESULTS: Data from both Ineraid and Nucleus cochlear implant users suggest that EABR threshold, slope of the EABR growth function, and behavioral measures of threshold and dynamic range remain reasonably stable for periods up to 5 yr postimplant. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show little evidence that prolonged electrical stimulation through daily use of a cochlear implant has deleterious effects on the auditory system.

Evaluation of five different cochlear implant designs: audiologic assessment and predictors of performance.

The audiologic performance of 54 postlingually deafened adults wearing cochlear implants was uniformly evaluated. The participants had 9 months' or more experience with one of five different cochlear prostheses (Los Angeles Single Channel (N = 11), Vienna Single Channel (N = 4), Melbourne Multichannel (N = 18), Utah Multichannel (N = 19), San Francisco Multichannel (N = 2). The multichannel designs enabled participants to recognize more environmental sounds, provided more speech reading enhancement, and enabled most users to understand limited speech in the sound-only condition, compared to the single-channel implant group.

Preliminary assessment of the Los Angeles, Vienna and Melbourne cochlear implants.

We tested four patients using the single-channel cochlear implant from Los Angeles, three patients using the single-channel cochlear implant from Vienna, and two patients using the multichannel cochlear implant from Melbourne. Tests from the MAC battery and the Iowa Cochlear Implant Battery were used. Most patients were able to identify some environmental sounds. Three of the patients had difficulty distinguishing between male and female voices, and three could not distinguish between a noise and a voice. All patients had difficulty discriminating between unknown speakers of the same sex. A four-choice spondee test in noise showed that all patients suffered drastically from background noise. In all cases there was an improvement in lipreading ability with the implant. On a sentence test with a contextual cue seven patients got some words with sound alone. Results obtained with the multichannel implant are superior on several tasks, but we have tested too few patients to allow us any firm conclusions.