Cortical Activation Patterns Correlate with Speech Understanding After Cochlear Implantation.

OBJECTIVES: Cochlear implants are a standard therapy for deafness, yet the ability of implanted patients to understand speech varies widely. To better understand this variability in outcomes, the authors used functional near-infrared spectroscopy to image activity within regions of the auditory cortex and compare the results to behavioral measures of speech perception. DESIGN: The authors studied 32 deaf adults hearing through cochlear implants and 35 normal-hearing controls. The authors used functional near-infrared spectroscopy to measure responses within the lateral temporal lobe and the superior temporal gyrus to speech stimuli of varying intelligibility. The speech stimuli included normal speech, channelized speech (vocoded into 20 frequency bands), and scrambled speech (the 20 frequency bands were shuffled in random order). The authors also used environmental sounds as a control stimulus. Behavioral measures consisted of the speech reception threshold, consonant-nucleus-consonant words, and AzBio sentence tests measured in quiet. RESULTS: Both control and implanted participants with good speech perception exhibited greater cortical activations to natural speech than to unintelligible speech. In contrast, implanted participants with poor speech perception had large, indistinguishable cortical activations to all stimuli. The ratio of cortical activation to normal speech to that of scrambled speech directly correlated with the consonant-nucleus-consonant words and AzBio sentences scores. This pattern of cortical activation was not correlated with auditory threshold, age, side of implantation, or time after implantation. Turning off the implant reduced the cortical activations in all implanted participants. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these data indicate that the responses the authors measured within the lateral temporal lobe and the superior temporal gyrus correlate with behavioral measures of speech perception, demonstrating a neural basis for the variability in speech understanding outcomes after cochlear implantation.

A Consensus to Revise the Minimum Speech Test Battery-Version 3.

PURPOSE: The Minimum Speech Test Battery (MSTB) for adults was introduced in 1996 (Nilsson et al., 1996) and subsequently updated in 2011 (Advanced-Bionics et al., 2011). The MSTB has been widely used by clinicians as a guide for cochlear implant (CI) candidacy evaluations and to document post-operative speech recognition performance. Due to changes in candidacy over the past 10 years, a revision to the MSTB was needed. METHOD: In 2022, the Institute for Cochlear Implant Training (ICIT) recruited a panel of expert CI audiologists to update and revise the MSTB. This panel utilized a modified Delphi consensus process to revise the test battery and to improve its applicability considering recent changes in CI care. RESULTS: This resulted in the MTSB-Version 3 (MSTB-3), which includes test protocols for identifying not only traditional CI candidates but also possible candidates for electric-acoustic stimulation and patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss. The MSTB-3 provides information that supplements the earlier versions of the MSTB, such as recommendations of when to refer patients for a CI, recommended patient-reported outcome measures, considerations regarding the use of cognitive screeners, and sample report templates for clinical documentation of pre- and post-operative care. Electronic versions of test stimuli, along with all the materials described above, will be available to clinicians via the ICIT website (https://www.cochlearimplanttraining.com). CONCLUSION: The goal of the MSTB-3 is to be an evidence-based test battery that will facilitate a streamlined standard of care for adult CI candidates and recipients that will be widely used by CI clinicians.

Outcomes in Patients Meeting Cochlear Implant Criteria in Noise but Not in Quiet.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate outcomes in cochlear implant (CI) recipients qualifying in AzBio noise but not quiet, and identify factors associated with postimplantation improvement. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary otology/neurotology clinic. PATIENTS: This study included 212 implanted ears. The noise group comprised 23 ears with preoperative AzBio more than or equal to 40% in quiet and less than or equal to 40% in +10 signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The quiet group included 189 ears with preoperative AzBio less than 40% in quiet. The two groups displayed similar demographics and device characteristics. INTERVENTIONS: Cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: AzBio in quiet and noise. RESULTS: Mean AzBio quiet scores improved in both the quiet group (pre-implant: 12.7%, postimplant: 67.2%, p < 0.001) and noise group (pre-implant: 61.6%, postimplant: 73.8%, p = 0.04). Mean AzBio +10 SNR also improved in the quiet group (pre-implant: 15.8%, postimplant: 59.3%, p = 0.001) and noise group (pre-implant: 30.5%, postimplant: 49.1%, p = 0.01). However, compared with the quiet group, fewer ears in the noise group achieved within-subject improvement in AzBio quiet (≥15% improvement; quiet group: 90.3%, noise group: 43.8%, p < 0.001) and AzBio +10 SNR (quiet group: 100.0%, noise group: 45.5%, p < 0.001). Baseline AzBio quiet (p < 0.001) and Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) scores (p = 0.004) were associated with within-subject improvement in AzBio quiet and displayed a higher area under the curve than either aided or unaided pure-tone average (PTA) (both p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: CI patients qualifying in noise display significant mean benefit in speech recognition scores but are less likely to benefit compared with those qualifying in quiet. Patients with lower baseline AzBio quiet scores are more likely to display postimplant improvement.

Unilateral Cochlear Implants for Severe, Profound, or Moderate Sloping to Profound Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Consensus Statements.

Importance: Cochlear implants are a treatment option for individuals with severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) who receive little or no benefit from hearing aids; however, cochlear implantation in adults is still not routine. Objective: To develop consensus statements regarding the use of unilateral cochlear implants in adults with severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral SNHL. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a modified Delphi consensus process that was informed by a systematic review of the literature and clinical expertise. Searches were conducted in the following databases: (1) MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Ovid MEDLINE, (2) Embase, and (3) the Cochrane Library. Consensus statements on cochlear implantation were developed using the evidence identified. This consensus process was relevant for the use of unilateral cochlear implantation in adults with severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral SNHL. The literature searches were conducted on July 18, 2018, and the 3-step Delphi consensus method took place over the subsequent 9-month period up to March 30, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: A Delphi consensus panel of 30 international specialists voted on consensus statements about cochlear implantation, informed by an SR of the literature and clinical expertise. This vote resulted in 20 evidence-based consensus statements that are in line with clinical experience. A modified 3-step Delphi consensus method was used to vote on and refine the consensus statements. This method consisted of 2 rounds of email questionnaires and a face-to-face meeting of panel members at the final round. All consensus statements were reviewed, discussed, and finalized at the face-to-face meeting. Results: In total, 6492 articles were identified in the searches of the electronic databases. After removal of duplicate articles, 74 articles fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria and were used to create the 20 evidence-based consensus statements. These 20 consensus statements on the use of unilateral cochlear implantation in adults with SNHL were relevant to the following 7 key areas of interest: level of awareness of cochlear implantation (1 consensus statement); best practice clinical pathway from diagnosis to surgery (3 consensus statements); best practice guidelines for surgery (2 consensus statements); clinical effectiveness of cochlear implantation (4 consensus statements); factors associated with postimplantation outcomes (4 consensus statements); association between hearing loss and depression, cognition, and dementia (5 consensus statements); and cost implications of cochlear implantation (1 consensus statement). Conclusions and Relevance: These consensus statements represent the first step toward the development of international guidelines on best practices for cochlear implantation in adults with SNHL. Further research to develop consensus statements for unilateral cochlear implantation in children, bilateral cochlear implantation, combined electric-acoustic stimulation, unilateral cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness, and asymmetrical hearing loss in children and adults may be beneficial for optimizing hearing and quality of life for these patients.

Multicenter US Clinical Trial With an Electric-Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) System in Adults: Final Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the MED-EL Electric-Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) System, for adults with residual low-frequency hearing and severe-to-profound hearing loss in the mid to high frequencies. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, repeated measures. SETTING: Multicenter, hospital. PATIENTS: Seventy-three subjects implanted with PULSAR or SONATA cochlear implants with FLEX electrode arrays. INTERVENTION: Subjects were fit postoperatively with an audio processor, combining electric stimulation and acoustic amplification. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Unaided thresholds were measured preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postactivation. Speech perception was assessed at these intervals using City University of New York sentences in noise and consonant-nucleus-consonant words in quiet. Subjective benefit was assessed at these intervals via the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit and Hearing Device Satisfaction Scale questionnaires. RESULTS: Sixty-seven of 73 subjects (92%) completed outcome measures for all study intervals. Of those 67 subjects, 79% experienced less than a 30 dB HL low-frequency pure-tone average (250-1000 Hz) shift, and 97% were able to use the acoustic unit at 12 months postactivation. In the EAS condition, 94% of subjects performed similarly to or better than their preoperative performance on City University of New York sentences in noise at 12 months postactivation, with 85% demonstrating improvement. Ninety-seven percent of subjects performed similarly or better on consonant-nucleus-consonant words in quiet, with 84% demonstrating improvement. CONCLUSION: The MED-EL EAS System is a safe and effective treatment option for adults with normal hearing to moderate sensorineural hearing loss in the low frequencies and severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss in the high frequencies who do not benefit from traditional amplification.

Cochlear implant outcomes in the elderly.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review cochlear implantation with respect to surgical and auditory outcomes in subjects aged 70 years and older. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Tertiary referral centers. PATIENTS: Sixty-five patients aged 70 years or older at the time of implantation were compared to a group of patients aged <70 years. INTERVENTION: Patients underwent multichannel cochlear implantation with either the Clarion or Nucleus device. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Presence or absence of surgical complications and auditory performance with open-set word and sentence recognition testing. RESULTS: In patients implanted at age 70 or older, significant improvement in speech understanding was demonstrated in performance scores using Consonant Nucleus Consonant words, Central Institute for the Deaf sentences, and Hearing in Noise Test sentences at 3, 6, and 12 months when compared to preimplantation scores. However, their performance was slightly poorer when compared to a control group of patients <70 years of age in the same measures at 3, 6, and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The elderly population showed significant improvement in auditory performance tests following cochlear implantation compared to their preimplantation scores but performed less well than younger patients.

Tinnitus suppression by low-rate electric stimulation and its electrophysiological mechanisms.

Tinnitus is a phantom sensation of sound in the absence of external stimulation. However, external stimulation, particularly electric stimulation via a cochlear implant, has been shown to suppress tinnitus. Different from traditional methods of delivering speech sounds or high-rate (>2000 Hz) stimulation, the present study found a unique unilaterally-deafened cochlear implant subject whose tinnitus was completely suppressed by a low-rate (<100 Hz) stimulus, delivered at a level softer than tinnitus to the apical part of the cochlea. Taking advantage of this novel finding, the present study compared both event-related and spontaneous cortical activities in the same subject between the tinnitus-present and tinnitus-suppressed states. Compared with the results obtained in the tinnitus-present state, the low-rate stimulus reduced cortical N100 potentials while increasing the spontaneous alpha power in the auditory cortex. These results are consistent with previous neurophysiological studies employing subjects with and without tinnitus and shed light on both tinnitus mechanism and treatment.