Factors Predictive of Binaural Hearing Restoration by Cochlear Implant in Single-Sided Deafness.

INTRODUCTION: Cochlear implants (CIs) can restore binaural hearing in cases of single-sided deafness (SSD). However, studies with a high level of evidence in support of this phenomenon are lacking. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of CIs using several spatialized speech-in-noise tests and to identify potential predictors of successful surgery. METHODS: Ten cases underwent standard CI surgery (MEDEL-Flex24). The speech-in-noise test was used in three different spatial configurations. The noise was presented from the front (N0), toward the CI (NCI), and toward the ear (Near), while the speech was always from the front (S0). For each test, the speech-to-noise ratio at 50% intelligibility (SNR50) was evaluated. Seven different effects were assessed (summation, head shadow [HS], speech released of masking [SRM], and squelch for the CI and for the ear). RESULTS: A significant summation effect of 1.5 dB was observed. Contralateral PTA was positively correlated with S0N0-B and S0NCI-B (CIon and unplugged ear). S0N0-B results were positively correlated with S0N0-CIoff (p < 0.0001) and with S0Near-CIoff results (p = 0.004). A significant positive correlation was found between delay post-activation and HS gain for the CI (p = 0.005). Finally, the HS was negatively correlated with the squelch effect for the ear. CONCLUSION: CI benefits patients with SSD in noise and can improve the threshold for detecting low-level noise. Contralateral PTA could predict good postoperative results. Simple tests performed preoperatively can predict the likelihood of surgical success in reversing SSD.

Cochlear Implant: Analysis of the Frequency-to-Place Mismatch with the Table-Based Software OTOPLAN® and Its Influence on Hearing Performance.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the originally applied frequency allocation of cochlear implant electrodes assigned by default at the time of activation with a more recent frequency allocation that is anatomy-based by a software called OTOPLAN®. Based on a computed tomography scan of the temporal bone, this software calculates the position of each electrode in the cochlea and its corresponding tonotopic frequency. We also evaluated whether patients with a significant mismatch between these two allocations present poorer speech intelligibility. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent cochlear implantation from 2016 to 2021 at the University Hospital of Liege were included in this retrospective study. We used OTOPLAN® to calculate the tonotopic frequency allocation of each electrode according to its exact position in the cochlear duct. This anatomical frequency mapping was compared with the default frequency mapping at the time of cochlear implant activation. Finally, we compared the mismatch with the patients' auditory performance, represented by the Auditory Capacity Index (ACI). RESULTS: Thirteen patients were included in the study. All patients had a mismatch between the two frequency maps, to a variable extent (200 Hz-1,100 Hz). Frequency shift was significantly inversely correlated with ACI and with the time needed to improve speech intelligibility. CONCLUSION: Our primary results show that patients with a larger mismatch between default frequency mapping and anatomically assigned frequency mapping experience poorer hearing performance and slower adaptation to a cochlear implant.